I hope you enjoy this videotape series you're about to watch this is myself debating dr. Hugh Ross from reasons to believe in Pasadena California dr. Ross and I met to debate on the John Ankerberg show about some of the differences among what he believes and what I believe on the topics like for instance the age of the earth and was there death before sin I am so concerned about things Hugh Ross teaches during the debate many things were brought up I just simply did not have time to respond to and Hugh Ross said so many things that I thought oh wait a minute we got to stop the tape and make a comment about this okay but just in a debate it's kind of a blizzard of facts flying back and forth and they just simply wasn't time so I flew into any faulkner that he was referred to several times in the debate and I flew in James Sundquist a friend of mine to come here to Pensacola Florida to my ministry and we let them watch the tape as Hugh Ross would say things and I would say things back and forth and we'd let them stop and make comments what you're about to see is just a fraction of the statements that say who else would make something we'll show you the last sentence or two so you get the context of what he's talking about and then give comments about what he said things that just simply got left hanging then in addition to the tapes of our comments you can go back and see the actual debate itself as it went along and it'll make a lot more sense to you where these comments fit in hope you enjoyed this if you have any questions at all please don't hesitate to call us we are convinced that the Bible is indeed the Word of God it's infallible and inspired and though I think Hugh Ross is a very nice man he is very seriously wrong on some doctrine and my job is to do what's right okay and so I'm going to teach sincerely and honestly what I think the Bible teaches and if somebody disagrees great I can disagree without being disagreeable and I'll be glad to discuss this with anybody I would be honored to debate who Ross again at any time I was a little unprepared for the way they attacked this first of all I was kind of unprepared that John Ankerberg would join on heroes aside so often on this I got many letters and phone calls saying wow or two against one on that one you can judge for yourself on that when you watch the debate but most of Hugh's argument is appeal to Authority well dr. professor so-and-so so says this for that doesn't mean anything okay what does God's Word say that's the ultimate authority and I was taken off-guard when the John Ankerberg kept referring to gleason archer who a very smart man no question but definitely a product of his times who is trying desperately to squeeze Millions ears into the Bible and trying to make the Bible say that and over and over in the debate you see them say make statements like well doesn't this leave room for interpreting days as something else well leaving room for something a first place I don't think it does leave room but leaving room for it and the fact and making it a fact or two of wildly different things and you need to always keep that thought in mind hope you enjoyed this if you have any questions afterwards please don't hesitate to call if this is all you're seeing of our material we have an awful lot of videotapes a large number of videotapes and books and things that will be helpful in your Christian growth now if you're not a Christian we'd encourage you to trust Christ as your Savior we have a 15 hour seminar that's our blue series of tapes if you look on our website dr. Dino comm you can see that we also have quite a few debates that I've done with professors who claim to be atheists or agnostics or certainly believe in evolution we have currently twelve of those on videotape plus quite a few other tapes of miscellaneous topics like the Bible in health and magic tricks and things like that that you might want to get on our green series of tapes sir to our website dr. Dino calm or if you'd like us to send you a catalog we'll be glad to send you on just call us we have toll-free in the United States is 877 if you're outside the US you have to dial eight five oh then the numbers the same after that it's four seven nine Dino four seven nine three four six six or you can write to us at twenty nine cummings road see you mM ing s Pensacola Florida three two five oh three thank you today on the John Ankerberg show we invite you to listen to a debate on science in the Bible our topic are the universe and the earth billions of years old or just thousands of years old does the information in Genesis chapter one and to agree with contemporary scientific evidence my guests are astronomer dr. Hugh Ross an educator dr. Kent Hovind we invite you to join us for this special debate on the John Ankerberg show we're talking tonight with two special guests about the topic as the universe and the earth are they billions of years old or just thousands of years old and our Genesis 1 and 2 compatible with contemporary scientific evidence today my guests are dr. Hugh Ross who received his PhD in astronomy from the University of Toronto it is postdoctoral research on quasars at Caltech also dr. Kent Hovind received his PhD in education writing his doctoral dissertation on the subject of creation and evolution guys were glad that you're here tonight and we're going to start right off with an important question and dr. Ross I'd like to start with you the Bible says in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth now you believe the scientific evidence for the big bang proves that this statement is true but you also believe that the Big Bang Theory shows that the age of the universe and the earth is billions of years old and the scientific evidence astronomers have discovered about the Big Bang it perfectly fits the biblical creation account in Genesis 1 and 2 why talk to us sure well I like to give credit where it's due and a lot of people think Albert Einstein and George Gamow were the ones that discovered the Big Bang but in truth they are upstaged by 2,000 years by Moses and David and sakurai ax Jeremiah Isaiah because what you see is 8 times the Bible states that the universe was transcendently created a transcendent beginning of matter energy space and time which is identical to the Big Bang concept of a singular beginning and likewise in a in different places in the Bible it tells us that the universe is continually experiencing ongoing expansion you know the stretching out of the heavens it's in the Cal active participle form this continual stretching out and the third point is that you have in Romans chapter 8 that the entire creation is subject to the law of decay and that implies that the universe was much hotter in the past than it is now otherwise you're not going to get this progress towards decay and those are the three fundamental principles of the Big Bang Theory and so the question is not whether or not it's a Big Bang but Rudy think that divides us is how long has the universe been expanding and I can suggest seven easy tests there are a dozen more that are more complicated but I think the two that are the most compelling as the stars and planets are impossible unless the universe has been expanding for billions of years it's only thousands all you get is hydrogen gas if it's trillions all you get are black holes moreover you can only get stable orbits of planets about stars and stars of both the Centers of galaxies if the universe has been expanding continually okay for billions of years the answers here the fact is where is the scientific community do they are they admitting that the universe had a start yes give me an example while you've got Stephen Hawking for example who produced the spacetimes theorem of general relativity and that theorem is based only two conditions if the universe contains mass and a bathroom scale is usually enough to convince most skeptics and number two if the dynamics of the universe is governed by the equations of general relativity then there must exist a cause that brings the universe into existence independent of matter energy and ten space-time dimensions okay so let's at a start are they a little troubled by that problem very much I mean one of my books I wrote about over 60 years astronomers did everything they could to get around the implications general relativity but observational evidence forced them to accept that this is really true and fight general ativy now ranks as the best proven principle in all of physics all right so to sum up the fact is matter energy and all the rest has not been here eternally which is what science is now saying at admitting if you had a start you had to have a starter so in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth is coming on very strong in the scientific community yeah and it's not a Hindu starter it's a Christian starter and it was unique about Christianity it alone speaks about God creating independent of mad or energy space and time even time is created all right okay you also believe the biblical statement that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth but you differ in believing when God did it you think that he did it 6,000 years ago what scientific evidence proves the universe is young and the Big Bang Theory is not true in terms of time I would have to say if the if what you're proposing is true then there is no possible way the average person in the world can read this book and understand it the God that I worship wrote a book that anybody can read and understand the vast majority of it and this book clearly says God made everything in six days they were days just like we have today I think the Big Bang Theory is one of the most ridiculous ideas I've ever heard of in the world and I think we'll have an interesting discussion on that tonight okay tell us why well Big Bang Theory does not explain the origin of time space or matter what exploded where did it come from where did the energy come from why are some of the planets spinning backwards to others you know if a spinning object breaks apart in a frictionless environment everything spins the same way and yet we have Venus Uranus and possibly Pluto spinning backwards and at least six moons spinning backwards and he mentioned the everything is tending toward decay and yet what he said about the Big Bang is exactly the opposite of that where did all this stuff come from here what do you come back with well I mean we're talking about the case since the transcendent beginning I mean where does God need to use a big bang why not just make it right that's what he says he did he says he created matter energy space and time that's exactly what the Big Bang is saying it's identical there's no difference between Genesis 1:1 there's no difference between what you're saying and what Carl Sagan says that's what I see I see what you say is being totally foreign to God's Word and I get real nervous when I when somebody teeth or something well when somebody teaches something where we have to have a guru to explain it now you have a cult we don't need to read this book and understand it as I said you've got six different Bible authors speaking about the heavens being continually stretched out I know there are six different times where it says God stretched out the heavens yes this is the Big Bang well the Big Bang says that a transcendent being is the one that's responsible for that I agree there is stretching of the heavens but I don't think that proves it's billions years old so that's where you went from the observation to the interpretation of the observation and where you get to journal do you agree that the universe contains planets and stars we know that we have at least nine planets around our Sun and yes our plane stars out there trillions and trillions them like all there are planets and their stars and it's been expanding for billions of years well I guess we don't know that it's been expanding we do see a redshift with some from some of the stars and some interpret that to mean expanding some interpret that to mean tired light sound for our people out in the audience there and that is basically what you're saying is that okay if we do have planets and we do have stars out there that you I think what you're saying is that it's an astronomy that there's a way of measuring how far away those guys are okay all right and I hear Kent saying no let's start how do you know how far away they are and then let's have can't come back on that now there's what are the tip-offs well let me underline gender principle point though that very existence of stars and planets means it's been expanding for billions of years to support thousands of years you got to get rid of all the stars planets galaxies and moons and as an astronomer I can tell you there really are stars out there that really are planets and moons it's not a mirage we live on a planet there's a star that supplies us but heat that's all you need it's very simple you don't have to have a PhD to figure this out the universe expands too fast none of the protons and neutrons will ever cut away no far away they are and how long it's been expanding well because of the new paper published just in the June first issue of Astrophysical Journal I've got the paper here with me we now have trigonometric parallax distances as far out as 3c 279 what in the worlds that made that's a quasar that's six billion light years away but how do you know it's 6 billion okay how do you know there are variations taking place inside the quasar that guarantee that the variations must be taking place over a certain number of miles diameter radio astronomers have developed a new technique where they can take telescopes all over the world and put together the equivalent of a telescope with a six thousand mile diameter which allows them to measure angles with extreme precision and it's that technique that has enabled them to establish that this object is a minimum of six billion light years away and therefore the light must have taken six billion years to reach us this is independent of the expansion measures of the universe again well I was born at night but it wasn't last night okay and I had students all the time that tried this same technique it's called a snow job I guess to douse all with big numbers if you look at the I taught trigonometry I know how it works if you took a look at Earth's orbit around the Sun which is a huge circle okay Earth's orbit around the Sun is only 16 light minutes across it would take this it would take light 16 minutes to go across our orbit since we're eight light minutes away from the Sun some people confuse they think a light year is a time a light year is a distance we could have a whole thin minute you know how far can hope and run in one minute that's getting shorter each year by the way but I could say it is 12 hope in minutes to the store well that's a distance it's not a time and a light year is not it is it's a distance it's a just a shorter way to say a big number Earth's orbit around the Sun is 16 light minutes one year has over half a million minutes in it five hundred twenty-five thousand nine hundred and forty eight minutes in a year so if you're going to look at a star that is one light year away and not forget your 6000 year base of your triangle I'm talk sixteen light minutes 186 million miles I'll give you that if you had two surveyors up on the roof of this building and they were 16 inches apart and they were looking at a dot eight and a quarter miles away that would make a very skinny triangle real skinny triangle that's what you get that's the same angle you'd get when you have two people looking at a star from opposite sides of Earth's orbit and the stars only one light year away and none of them are that close so I just I just plain do not believe you I've read your books I I think I've learned an awful lot you have some great stuff in here but I think what we have here is a classic example of an exaggeration they cannot tell a star six billion light years out you're wrong on this here are two papers that have been published this one gives a trick parallax distance to NGC 4258 and you can tell me three and a half million well can I talk trig explain this Jamie you can say with trigonometry you can measure six billion light years yes you can I just flat don't believe you I'm sorry okay it's not just the diameter of the Earth's orbit that's going for you you can't tell where you were six months ago on opposite sides overthrown hang on okay the reason why we're able to do this now and not five years ago as we now have telescopes with extremely high resolution okay that can measure angles to better than a ten thousandth of an arc second this is what gets you out so far we're no longer limited to five hundred light years we can measure all of globular clusters and are they Hipparchus satellite did that got us out to the globular clusters but Radio Astronomy is getting us out to galaxies and quasars okay I would have to be convinced now I am NOT saying the stars are not billions of light-years away they probably are I just think it is hocus-pocus to say we can measure those distances because we cannot measure those distances yes we said thank you secondly we do not know we do not know that the speed of light has always been a constant yeah bring that up well I will talk about that and thirdly the God that I worship is able to make a full-grown man in a full-grown garden and full-grown universe he doesn't need 17 billion years to get it put together so we can live here he can make it right in six days and he's capable of writing a book that the average person can understand he's capable of doing all of that but he's also capable doing it in two nanoseconds the questioner question would be is what did he do the universe and the earth billions of years old or just thousands of years old what do you think our Genesis 1 & 2 compatible with contemporary scientific evidence a lot of people think that's not true got two guests tonight who think that it is true and my guests are dr. Hugh Ross who received his PhD in astronomy from the University of Toronto did postdoctoral research on quasars at Caltech also dr. Kent Hovind received his PhD in education running his doctoral dissertation on the subject of creation versus evolution now I'd like to start off this segment right here with the fact of just going down something we can all follow Genesis chapter 1 you haven't heard anybody do this and we're gonna see if the scientific evidence matches this I think this will be helpful to those of you at home I'm going to read it my first question is what happened on day one scientifically the Bible says in the beginning God created the heavens in the earth now the earth was formless and empty darkness was over the surface of the deep and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters and God said let there be light what the world was that and there was light God saw the light was good and he separated the light from the darkness God called the light day the darkness he called night and there was evening and there was morning.the first day now it seems to me you got a couple things here God created the universe God created the earth it was formless and empty God creates light or kind of light is he talking about the Sun or something else God separates light from darkness the scientific evidence agree with this order what else do you guys see that's going on can't you want to start us off well sure I think anybody who averaged intelligence can read that and say well on the first day God created the material graded the heaven and the earth and then he made light and he chose six days to do this and in a day of rest to establish a seven-day week for us it's just six normal days just like we have today there's no difference at all and Exodus 20:11 the only thing God ever wrote with his own finger he wrote on a rock for Moses the Ten Commandments everything else he had somebody write for him he wrote with I rock with his finger and he doesn't stutter he said I made everything in six days okay me that means he made everything in six days - what happened there what's what's happening in day one okay in the beginning God created the heavens in the earth that's matter energy space and time as you can easily establish by going to seven other Bible passages which means there's light in the beginning but it's dark on the surface of the water as a planet Earth because the light of the heavens could not get through the Earth's atmosphere to the surface of the earth as a says in the first creation day let there be light uses the verb hyeyeon distinct from the verb bar on Genesis 1:1 God creates the light in the beginning it shows up on the surface of the earth on creation day 1 so creation day 1 is not the creation of light it's the appearance of light on the surface of the waters of planet Earth and now photosynthesis is possible on planet Earth so Genesis 1 2 in my opinion is simply the statement of four initial conditions the earth began dark water over the whole face of the earth unfit for life and empty of life and now the Spirit of God begins to work and transform all right what about this word and there was evening and there was morning.the first day sure you're reading another King James reading this one off NIV and and but it is a distinct phrase that is used there the first day it should say and there is evening and there is morning right yes okay two verbs right - subject complements and one of our Hebrew scholars Paul Elbert has written a piece on this very theme and his point is that it was going to be 24 hours it would have to be an evening in an evening or morning and a morning the fact that his evening a morning establishes that the text is not speaking of 24-hour days but one of the other two literal definitions of the word day there being three could be twelve hours 24 hours or a long time period all three are literal all albert's point is a structure of the evening the morning establishes that is referring to something other in a 24-hour day okay let's let's just stay right here for a little bit because both of you are Christians both of you believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God salute it's not making a mistake here can you agree we have three options must inform me and I'll tell you if I agree well you've got though how the word Yama is used all through scripture you've got the day of the Lord which has got to be more than a 24-hour period of time okay okay you've got the fact of a 24-hour day and then also it's used for just a 12-hour period of time like the daytime I think if you gave this book to 5,000 people and said read this tell me what it says all 5,000 would come back and say this is saying he made it in six days when you have to have a guru to tell you what it says you now have a cult that's what makes me very nervous I think if let me read what the James Barr says he's a professor of Hebrew or was at Vanderbilt University former Regis professor at the Hebrew at Oxford University he said probably as far as so far as I know there is no professor of Hebrew of Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writers of Genesis 1 through 11 intended to convey to their readers the idea that the creation took place in a series of 6 days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience or to put it negatively the apologetic arguments which suppose the days of creation to be long eras of time the figures of years not to be chronological and the flood to be merely a local Mesopotamian flood are not taken seriously by such professors as far as I know that's simply not true it wasn't true when James Barr stated and it's certainly not true today now I speak on seminary campuses all the time and the majority of hold the idea that the text the plain read the text indeed implies long periods of time not 24 hours I mean on testimony to that I didn't meet Christians told us 27 when I read the Bible for the first time it was obvious to me it's speaking about 6 long time periods there is no closure on the seventh day he only got an evening in the morning for the first 6 days you read Genesis chapter 2 and look at everything that happens on the sixth day there are 10 creation accounts in the Bible in order to developed a correct interpretation of creation one must faithfully integrate all 10 not just focus on a couple of verses out of Genesis chapter give you a hint here ole dr. Gleason Archer was my Hebrew professor and if we go to the next chapter there's a tip-off I think in terms of what it is Genesis 2:4 referring back to the 7 days says this is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created referring back to those 7 days and then it says in the day that the Lord God made heaven and earth so you have one day referring to all those 7 so you have it as a period of time now gleason archer writes about this all biblical scholars admit that yama day may be used in a figurative or symbolic manner as well as in a literal sense he says this is very evident in Genesis 2 for this is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created henry morris of all folks says the King James Version translates the word yam as a period of time 65 times so the door is open and it's very interesting that even Moses himself is quoted in 2nd Peter 3:10 this way but the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night actually it's a but do not let this one fact escape your notice beloved that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years and he's quoting that from I think it's Psalm chapter 90 verse 4 which is a psalm of Moses and that's how Moses who wrote this passage used it I'm simply saying that there's exegetical grounds for opening the door for a stage or a period of time among the scholars yea gleason archer also made the point that on the sixth day you got Adam and Eve both created Genesis chapter 1 when you go to genesis 2 adam hangs around a long time before Eve gets created he's got to work the Garden of Eden he's got to name all the animals he goes through an operation he recovers and frankly I think what's going on is God dealing with them because men of a hard time integrating the physical creation the emotional creation of spiritual says Eve doesn't need this college class but Adam does I think it took him at least a semester to get through it well the fact is is uh for folks who don't know who Gleason Archer is Gleason Archer has taught most of your Hebrew scholars he graduated from Harvard with his PhD I think he knows like 22 different languages used to take notes in Hittite when he was in in class I used to quote from the lexicon he say that's wrong he would correct a lexicon I'd ever knew anybody that corrected the dictionary he'd write a letter and they would correct it he got my attention and so if he's open to the idea I'm open to the idea but the fact is is regardless let's go on here in terms of the order what happened on day two I didn't get to respond to please please go ahead I would disagree very strongly with what dr. Ross has said yes I think the days have to be six normal days because there's so many other references in scripture for instance Exodus 20:11 in the Ten Commandments God said I want you to worship on the surface rest on the Sabbath because I made everything in six days he wasn't telling him to work six million years and then finally take a break and the only two references he referred to about saw 2nd Peter 3:8 and Psalm 90 verse 4 both of them say a day is like a thousand years they don't see a million or a billion plus I think if you just read the first chapter you'll see God made the plants the grass and the trees on day three he made the Sun on day four and the Bible says clearly he created the Sun he didn't just make the light visible don't know where dr. Ross gets this idea that the smoke cleared and also they could see what the Sun was already there but that's just simply not true he created the Sun now a Hebrew word is very clear there and the six days of I mean how long can the plants live without the Sun plus the insects are made on day five and they pollinate the plants plus animals breathe in oxygen and breathe off carbon dioxide plants do the opposite the idea of these days being long periods of time is just ridiculous well let me just say this is so the Sun wasn't created on day one the light was made it doesn't say the Sun was made okay I just want to make sure you're saying that okay you think the Sun God is night definitely and the fourth day does not say that the Sun was created it uses the verb again hi y'all let there be the great lights in the 16th verse where it says so God made the Sun Moon and stars it's in the Cal perfect forum which simply states that the Sun and stars were made at some unspecified time in the past moreover not even an interpretation can the plants survive 24 hours they're not going to make it even a nanosecond without the heat and light of the Sun so obviously there's something wrong with your interpretation what I've seen from reading your work and I probably got I got an awful lot of letters from people who said boy I wish I could be there to debate you Ross you know I got a lot of people would like to visit many websites devoted to this topic you know of your your appearance of knowing Hebrew when you don't know any Hebrew a whole stable of Hebrew scholars if I received reasons to believe Trey and I and I can talk to people who read Hebrew also but I don't want you to you know mislead the audience into thinking you know Hebrew when you don't and neither do i all I can do but I don't think God writes a book where we have to know Hebrew the God that I worship is able to write a book and then preserve it and give it to us in a form that I can read and understand and I'm telling you nobody if you if you went to a mission field where there were no Christians and no concept of Christianity and just gave this book to them and said what does it say all of them would come back and say it says six days just like we have today can't I've been on the mission field that's not simply true I mean I've met all kinds of people have drawn a conclusion these are long periods of time but he's named one okay I mean there's some ladies that work with us in our office raised in Arkansas read the Bible on their own came to that conclusion high school education these are plain folk well there you had the key right there if they got a high school education in the public school they would have been taught evolution and then they would have read the Bible with every constant eleven years of age ms before they hit the high school years and when I read your testimony also in your book about how you you came to the Bible you had already decided the Big Bang Theory is true that was already a given in your mind you know disciple teaches it no it doesn't you already decided the earth is billionaire universes billions of years old and now you come to the Bible and try to force that interpretation on God's Word that's the wrong way to come to it well let me bring up this thing about Exodus chapter 20 again yes and that again Archer comments on this he did this at the council for biblical inerrancy when they were dried writing the draft and they asked him to do the exegesis on this Gleeson Archer used to teach a Trinity Divinity School Bruce walki used to teach chairman of Old Testament at Dallas these guys wrote a workbook on the Old Testament together and this is part of their commentary in terms of Exodus 28 through 11 in terms of what the Sabbath is mentioning and referring back to he says by no means does this demonstrate that 24-hour intervals were involved in the first six days any more than the eight-day celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles proves that the wilderness wanderings under Moses occupied only days remember Israel wandered in the wilderness for forty years so it was a symbolic commemoration of that time as what they're saying and I just point this out that how do we the very question you guys are grappling here for our people that are at home how are they supposed to approach this you've got the verse in Genesis chapter 2 where it does seem to say that a day refers to the whole spectrum of whatever time period those six days seven days occurred in the first chapter you have the day of the Lord which everybody seems their Greek can go on into eternity you've got other suggestions of periods of time if it opens the door there have been people that I have known that have just approached it and said that's a possibility they haven't known the science but it's a possibility but I'm saying if it is a possibility our evangelicals wrong in exploring that possibility because you do have biblical support and other places for it I think you should explore all possibilities I'm and I'm an educator I think when you teach a real true education shows the kids all the options I think we should study that option that the days might be long periods of time I would like you to show me any place in scripture where it says a day is not a 24-hour day if it also uses that the evening in the morning phrase with it and the first day the second day the third day I mean the Bible just couldn't be more clear and then it's reinforced in Exodus chapter 20 and an Exodus chapter 31 about God did it all six days let's pick that theme up I mean Exodus 20 that whole idea of the fourth commandments repeated five times in the Levitical law only two of the five times does it give you the divine analogy for in six days and we also note in both cases the prepositions not in the original it simply says for six days imagined Hebrew again imagine Hebrew neither do i okay well I've checked it out I've checked it out with Hebrew scholars they assure me that the prepositions not there I can read the actual text it's not in the original and have you read the long critique of what you just said on Answers in Genesis website about this very topic you're talking about sure have and what's your response my response is it doesn't withstand the scrutiny of Hebrew scholarship he also ignores the problem of Leviticus chapter 25 there he got the case of God setting up a work period and a rest period for the agricultural land it is to be worked six years and rest there in the seventh year correct so I'd go along with gleason archer what you got next to this twenty is an analogy not an exact equation there I disagree all right it's good to take a break and we come back we're going on to the second day to find out we're going down toward Adam and Eve when they were created when the animals were created and what was going on so stick with us we'll be right back [Applause] we're talking with dr. Hugh Ross who received his PhD in astronomy from the University of Toronto did postdoctoral research on quasar at Caltech and dr. Kent Holman who received his PhD in education writing his doctoral dissertation on the subject of creation versus evolution our topic is our the universe and the earth billions of years old or just thousands of years old our Genesis 1 and 2 compatible with contemporary scientific evidence should they be and that's a good question too but we're gonna go down use the using chapter 1 of Genesis because a lot of folks have kind of discarded this and I thought let's have our scientists let's actually comment on what these verses are talking about we hit day one last last time we're going to talk about day two Genesis 1 6 through 8 and says and God said let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water so God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it and it was so God called the expanse sky and there was evening and there was morning the second day he what happened on day two well hopefully we agree agree here I mean I see that as a reference to God establishing a stable abundant water cycle but one of our colleagues dr. Robert Newman is both an astronomer and a theologian wrote his master's thesis in theology on that very point careful exegesis of the words reveals that it's speaking about God's setting up an abundance of water in the atmosphere the troposphere more correctly water in the ocean and you got a cycling which is gonna make possible sufficient water on the future continental land masses all right Kurt okay well if God set up the water cycle then why did it say later it had not rained upon the earth you know what you're saying is this had it rained upon the earth for millions of years was there a normal water cycle before is this a date in day two definitely well that the Bible says very clearly it had not rained okay now you're quoting from Genesis chapter 2 it says God mist went forth and watered the face of the ground because it had not rained upon the earth yeah but it's in the same context that there is no man no plant I mean it's simply a restatement of the initial conditions you've got there in Jena is one I mean what you have in Genesis 2 is a second account of creation but a focus on human beings the second account of creation focusing on day six yes all of chapter 2 except for the first four verses is dealing with what happened in the garden only and only on day six it's not talking about you're quoting verses five and six so to Genesis two and it's simply establishing the context for God creating Adam and placing them in the Garden of Eden and later creating Eve it doesn't go in ordered lists how much later did he create Eve was it the same day the same sixth day correct which was a long period which was a long period of time right okay this is where you got to make sure I understand what you really mean sure I what you say because I've read enough of your stuff to know to check that out the so you think Adam was there for a long time by himself you say I do recover from surgery and had to go to college for a semester and learn he had to name wall-e an old name all the animals that took a long time I had to work the Garden of Eden correct well let's go back to day three we're gonna get to that all right what happened with Adam and Eve but let's keep it in context because our folks out here trying to follow so the fact is basically day two we had what happened water cycle water cycle I disagree I think on day two we had a firmament established which is clearly later spelled out in Genesis 1:20 as being the place where the birds fly Genesis 1:20 says the birds fly in the firmament of heaven so that's the atmosphere it says there was water above this atmosphere that's what it says very clearly and then also in Psalm 148 verse 4 it says they were there are still waters above the heavens I suspect God made three heavens first heaven is the atmosphere where the birds fly the second heaven is where the stars are we call it outer space Sun Moon and stars the third heaven is where God lives 2nd Corinthians chapter 12 the Apostle Paul tells about being caught up to the third heaven and apparently there was a water barrier between each of those the first one is probably now gone that's what fell down at the flood I don't know if it was ice or water or moisture or what but wouldn't have the ball down immediately what's gonna hold it up there if I read your book and it you make a strong what's called a straw man argument you assume that all the water for the flood came from this canopy even as some of it just came from now right now yeah but I mean any of it okay clouds are water they float just fine I believe there's any more water up there before the flood than after the flood I think there was somehow a canopy of water suspended up there I can't prove this is the County Meath different than what we have right now all probably so I think that it's got to come down it did come down it rained 40 days important it will come down immediately it wouldn't wait I mean the law gravities are they gonna dissipate it to outer space or bring it crashing to the earth there are plenty there's plenty of water out there in the atmosphere right now but there's a limit to how much it can hold I agree and it was right at that limit very much know that you know you don't either know what it was spirit physics the Bible says very clearly that most of the water for the flood came from inside the earth when the crust of the earth broke open the Fountains of the deep broke open that's where the majority came from yeah and I think we still today have the scars where this happened they're called fault lines you know San Andreas Fault Hayward Fault New Madrid fault and I've studied all those none of my fault but I've studied them and I think that those the the flood in the days of Noah happened when this water came out from inside the earth and the canopy collapsed which is one of the explanation let me move you on because you're gonna get into it in the day 3 here as well let's just roll over into it this is what happened on day 3 God said let the water under the sky be gathered to one place and let dry ground appear and it was so God called the dry ground land and they'll gathered water waters he called seas and God saw that it was good then God said Let The Land produce vegetation seed bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it according to their various kinds and it was so the Land produce vegetation plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds God saw that was good there was evening there was morning the third day we have the receding of the waters of the ocean seas and lakes taking place we have the emergence of land above the seas taking place plants and trees come forth at that point what else do you guys see taking place and how long was this going on it took one day 24 hours oh I would see it as taking a much longer period of time there's no long huh hello all probably in the order of a few hundred million years I mean how you're gonna get these continents forming right okay texts we have today ya know the continents today are a result of noah's flood the shapes of the shape chanted a's that's six thousand miles of plate tectonics in just a few months of time that is assuming of course that today's continents are like they were in the days of Adam and Eve see what you've done is you've taken some scriptures that clearly apply to the flood the worldwide flood in the days of Noah and Haley that tectonics is operable in the earth I was just on the San Andreas Fault last week yeah that's moving okay sure that's a result of the flood forty four hundred years ago the plates are still moving the Fountains of the deep broke opened the water came to the surface they're still settling and shifting I've climbed 40 volcanoes taught her science for years yes sir but let you squish that much tectonics and that brief of the period touch tectonics away what are you try to do you trying to put Africa and South America together is that what you're judging this by either that or just produce the mountains that are necessary for your interpretation in order to make Africa and South America fit for the Pangaea theory they put in the textbooks they shrank Africa 30 to 5 35 to 40 percent Pangaea theory is just pure baloney plus if you maybe check that out with geophysicists well let's just let me finish if you take this important if you're gonna make these statements at the very least you got to do always check it out let's go to the geophysicist and say give me your feedback have you talked to the I taught her signs for 15 years get you get any get any high school textbook which is what I taught measure the size of the continents they show for Pangaea get a ratio and then go measure it on a real globe and you'll say wow how did they do that plus all of Mexico all of Central America is gone they take them out the shapes of the continents is a pure coincidence based on the water level if you take the water out of the oceans you will notice there is dirt underneath these continents are not floating around like lily pads in a bathtub they're connected it's just the low places happened before the water the opposite sides of most rivers are parallel with each other that doesn't mean they broke apart millions of years ago there's just a low place full of water that's you stating it I mean again check with the community of geophysicist and get their feedback about what about your plate tectonics theory is there any scientific support for your plate tectonics theory I agree the continents are moving a little bit a little bit that doesn't prove they're moving about as fast as your fingernails grow mm-hmm every professor of that subject that I know of would say about as fast as your fingernails grow obviously that doesn't prove they've always been moving at that rate and just because South America and Africa x-number miles apart you're just judging by the will of allah mention to me paul says everything must be tested if you're gonna choke lane the plate tectonics was millions of times faster than it is claimed those well I didn't say that either hundreds I didn't all I said was the shapes of the continents only appear to fit because of the water level yes the continents are moving but they've only been moving 4,400 years since the flood of the days of Noah what during the flood I don't know the Bible says the Fountains of the deep were broken open there was probably some incredible and continental movement during that flood and how you can teach it was a local flood I don't understand that I mean why would God tell nowhere to build a boat fill it full of animals stay in there for a year tell know what to move I mean I can figure that out it's a low it was a worldwide flood he could have told him to move but the reen main purpose here is that God set up Noah to be a prophet says no this gigantic boat in the desert and preached to this wicked generation if he had moved he would have lost his opportunity to preach do you really believe that yes it says so I mean uh he prison Peter so the purpose of this Ark was just to get attention it was a God always can bring all the kids in a pulpit alright we're gonna get to that too but you through the seven days here again I move down to day four cuz this gets us into the light again God said this is day four let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth and it was so God made two great lights the greater light to govern the day the lesser light to govern the night he also made the Stars God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth to govern the day in the night to separate light from darkness and God saw that it was good there was evening there was morning the fourth day question did God make the Sun did God make the Stars on day for you I'd say no it's in the Cal perfect form which means that they were formed I on the fourth day the third day the second day the first day are in the beginning go back to Genesis 1:1 in the beginning God created the Shumway on arrests that includes all a matter energy space and time stars and galaxies so that's when the light was that's when the Stars existed and what you see there in the text so these are to serve for signs for the animals that are going to be created in the fifth and sixth days you'll note that all the animals mentioned the fifth and six days are sufficiently complex they need at least the occasional visibility of the Sun Moon and stars to regulate their biological clocks this is one who actually looked it up and the Hebrew verb a verb is y yaaaas in verse 16 and according to archer again God had made the two great luminaries this should be Hebrew had no special form for the pluperfect tense but uses the perfect tense or the converse of imperfect is here during rest either the English past or the English perfect so what he's saying is God had made two great lights to da-da-da-da-da so that seems to open the door that the Sun and so on were already there but it does say he also made the Stars did he make stars on day four and didn't make him at the beginning well it's in the same Cal perfect form which means it could have been made any time in the past good so he personally had ready to get stars right okay well I don't know Gleason Archer and I know that an awful lot of the people in the past Scofield and takes for the big Study Bible have we're products over their time they were trying very hard to make the Bible say the earth is millions of years old because of the in the early 1800s some people started teaching the earth is millions years old Christians panicked and thought wow they're going to prove the Bible's wrong we've got to somehow make the Bible say this and so in the early 1800s you see the gap theory the day age Theory progressive creation lots of these theories which are just compromises there's the earth is not millions years old for one thing and why on earth should we compromise a perfectly good Bible which has never been proven wrong with a dumb theory of evolution which has never been proven right it's not evolution okay your theory of Big Bang is exactly like Carl Sagan's no it isn't but tell me the difference okay the difference is this Carl Sagan doesn't perceive design in the Big Bang we do in fact we stipulate that the greatest scientific evidence for design in creation is in the Big Bang characteristic isn't that the opposite though of the second law of thermodynamics well of course we have God creating the universe he's sending up the physics of the universe why not do it in six days like you said now you did do it in six days like he said six literal long periods of topics literal long periods of time yes so here you have day three of the plants living for millions of years without a visible clearly visible Sun I'm saying the Sun was always there what was going on is the atmosphere from day one to day four was translucent white was coming through but the observer and the surface of the earth the Spirit of God is brooding over the surface of the waters from that perspective he couldn't make up the distinction of the Sun Moon and stars only the light it's like where I was raised in British Columbia we got to see the Sun maybe two days out of the year because the rest of time it's overcast what you got going on before the fourth day is where it's overcast all the time fourth day we have the atmosphere becoming transparent for the first time and now we can have God creating creatures that need these things for signs to regulate their clocks okay I disagree you're saying that the Sun the Sun and Moon were created the word created and made are used interchangeably all through the scripture I've got a list of about I don't know 50 or 60 places where they're used interchangeably means the same thing he created in Maine scholars don't agree with that well so there's a decision saw and bra bra means you're telling us something is really brand-new when the text uses the verb Assad doesn't necessarily have to be brand new but it does have to be something as designed or manufactured by the Creator and I'm conceding that point I believe that the Big Bang the universe the earth the solar system our galaxy were all very carefully fine-tuned and engineered by the Creator well that's right differ from Carl Sagan this brings up a great concern for me after reading lots and lots of your material I really feel like I'm talking to a Mormon priest like you have a different God there's not the same God why do you say that well the Mormons will tell you they love God okay what do you mean yeah but the fact is is is he's saying Mormons are saying there's many gods okay you can make that will become God Bible's not saying that I don't hear you saying that are you saying that well no the God did I worship not only made it in six literal 24-hour days he's not deceitful he doesn't we don't have to wait for somebody to come along in the 20th century to explain it to us talk about the serious let's talk about that point the fact is that which is there when the scientists find it if it's not true would that be deceitful oh yes right there's no conflict between the Bible and science there's a conflict between the Bible in the Big Bang well they take the very thought of the fact of the light coming from the stars sure okay we got to talk about this we'll do in another program because you guys shut this one down but the fact is is that if the light is not what the scientists are saying that it did from all the measurements okay then God had to create it in transit therefore it's not really true no that's a false assumption you're setting up a straw man here if the stars are billions of light-years away and they probably are I would argue that they probably go beyond what we've met it will see so far you know every time they look at a spot in space they see more stars you know I don't know how far it goes probably goes forever and that blows the human mind you know how can it go forever well it doesn't go ever you know that it doesn't go forever definitely been there done that yes your trust your perception no we can see far enough away in astronomy that we can look back to that epoch when stars you can see them exist are you telling me and everybody in God's listening that scientists have now observed the farthest star there is yes yeah okay why am i who are you saying that what's the governor telescopes powerful enough to probe that far back in the history of the universe fact one of the astronomers of volunteers for us William keel after the University of Alabama that's his research field photographing the universe before galaxies exist before stars exists and showing the history of creation all right well yeah we wrap this up here in the facts we're going to come back and there's a couple things we come back so please hang in there with us you welcome we're talking today with two guests dr. Hugh Ross representing the old Earth a point of view the day aged creationist viewpoint and dr. Kent Hovind representing the young earth creationist viewpoint our topic is our the universe and the earth billions of years older just six thousand years old also our Genesis 1 and 2 compatible with contemporary scientific evidence and this is a dynamite program right here because we're going to talk about what aspect what part did evolution play in the origin of life if any we're going to talk about when how did God create Adam and Eve and we're going to talk about light and a few other things and we're doing it in the just going down the list here of Genesis chapter 1 and I'm gonna combine two days here guys because it's taking us a little longer than usual to get through these days what happened on day 5 and day 6 Genesis 1:20 starts us with day 5 God said let the water teem with living creatures let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky so God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems according to their kinds and every winged bird according to its kind God saw that was good God blessed them and said be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas let the birds increase on the earth there was evening there was morning the fifth day day 6 God said Let The Land produce living creatures according to their kinds livestock creatures that move along the ground and wild animals each according to its kind it was so God made the wild animals according to their kinds the livestock according to their kinds all the creatures that move along the ground according their kinds God saw that it was good then God said let us make man in our image in our likeness and let them rule over the fish of the sea in the birds of the air over the livestock over all the earth over all the creatures that move along the ground so it seems in these two days you got left the waters teem with living creatures the birds fly across the earth across the sky above the earth across the sky he made the great creatures in the sea then the livestock creatures that move along the ground wild animals and finally man alright first of all start me off does evolution have any place in any of this I would say no why well this by scientific modeling we can determine that there is no possibility for a species changing into a distinctly different species unless it exceeds 1 quadrillion individuals with a body size less than 1 centimeter and a generation time less than 3 months which means it's gonna work for viruses and bacteria but it's gonna have no capacity to explain the existence of new species of birds mammals or any of the creatures we see from the Cambrian explosion onward some folks on PBS are doing specials on chaos theory saying that that's the way it came about what do you think chaos theory in my opinion doesn't work yes you can get departures in thermodynamic equilibrium if you've got a complicated enough system and pick a small enough volume element in that system but there's an important corollary the farther you depart a system from thermodynamic equilibrium the faster must snap back as something as complex as a virus the snapback time is less than 10 and the minus 120 seconds so the fact that we're all older than that means that's not how we got here so you said all the plants all the animals and man none of that evolved no evolution and beyond you know not the species level the genes-- level order family none of that unless the species happens to have more than a Quadra individuals which is only a few Kent you've offered two nor $50,000 anybody that could prove that theory give me some illustrations of why you think they never will well all we've ever observed is dogs produced dogs nobody's ever seen a dog come from a non dog now they might want to believe that a dog and a banana have a common ancestor I don't care what they believe but that's not science and I certainly resent my tax dollars going to support that you need to get a King James birth brother by the way because you said wild animals the Bible don't say that they weren't while they were all tame all friendly animals in the in the original creation they were all part of you know Adam Adam got to pet them all they went out for a walk and the animals were all created on one literal day the sixth day and then Adam and Eve were both made on the sixth day it wasn't a long period of time between Adam and Eve like dr. Ross believes it was the same day and there's uh you know the God that I worship is able to do it right he's able to do it in in a few seconds okay but you're saying that God could is there any benefit of God doing it quicker than six 24-hour days in other words if that shows his power why not do it in two nanoseconds and really show off why do you say that he had he couldn't have done it longer we thought it was what a painter paints his picture I'm just okay he can take his time and doing whatever he wants he's the Creator right is there anything better about saying he that it you know over ten billion years of age two nanoseconds or six 24-hour days is there some spiritual quality that adheres to that well I'm the only reason I can see for God taking six days he could have done it in zero time he doesn't need any time at all you know it could have made it perfect and right and God doesn't need seventeen billion years to get the stars just right to support life for this brief time period like dr. Ross teaches in his books my God did it right in six days just like he said we have a solar reason that we have a year you know we go around the Sun once a year we have a lunar reason that we have a month you know used to be the month was about the same time as the lunar cycle there's no nobody knows why we have a seven-day week there's no you know what's the historical reason why why does every culture have a seven day week napoleon tried to change it to a 10-day week and it was disaster we're just kind of built with our biological clock to work six days and rest one and it's normal days God wasn't telling the Jews to work six million years and then rest or work six thousand years in then rest it typing a word on agricultural land six years oh yeah the seven-day week is established because of the creation and the biological clock is just a normal God just did it that way just so we'd have and I also think that God created it says in Genesis 1 that he made God said let us make man in our image the very next worth verse says so God created man here you got an example were created and made means the same thing I don't think so I think the making is referring to the fact that we have a physical component to us which previously existed previously existed do you do you believe Adam was literally made from dust and God breathed into his nostrils definitely and Eve was literally made from a rib no eyesight of Adam doesn't say ribbon attacks it's a support of that inside so we don't really know what kind of biopsy got to cut it Adam but you believe this literally took place yes well we finally agree on something there's one okay okay so we believe that God made Adam now let's let's what are the tip-offs of when we also have bipedal hominids going around it seems from anthropologists they go back past what the Bible says in terms of the genealogies that our gift sure okay let's talk about that how far back do you think the genealogies take us in Genesis uh sure said it was four thousand years BC BC right well the Hebrew scholars I've talked to said there's obvious gaps in the genealogies you can't fix a precise date like Archbishop Ussher did it assume no gaps but there's also uh there's a redditor there's a limit yeah I would be hard-pressed to push it any earlier than say fifty sixty thousand years and I got friends who try to push it back as far as a hundred thousand anything beyond that I think is right illegitimate so the fact is is that both you and Kent are in trouble as far as the anthropologists who want to take some of these other bipedal primates or hominids back to always a million years yeah if you want but the by pedals is human then you've got a problem all right so what do you guys do with them they're not human why aren't they human they're just like the primates they're like the chimpanzees orangutangs gorillas include Neanderthals as being in this category they're in that category too I disagree why Amanda Thals were deformed humans probably post-flood they were still burying people after they died if a person lives past a hundred years there's a disease called acromegaly where the pituitary gland keeps secreting growth hormones your ears get longer your nose gets bigger and your bones in your forehead get thicker the Neanderthals were simply post-flood humans who were deformed from diseases arthritis rickets cows are you aware that they have enormous nasal capacities and that their DNA is radically different from human DNA well now that's deceitful to say is radically different it's about four percent different and it's within the range you could go downtown go downtown Los Angeles and line up people and make an exact same chart like they've got in your textbook with the skull sloping different diseases and bone nose is larger nasal capacities larger no they're still human no no okay you can read a paper I got the paper here it's by Ian Tattersall in Jeffery Schwartz may examine 13 Neanderthal skulls complete skulls and discover that the nasal capacity was so enormous that there's no many it eliminated the possibility that Neanderthal was biologically linked to any other land mammal species not just primates they said we got a problem here we got this Neanderthal that we can't link with anything you're saying just because their nose is bigger they're not linked to anything but nothing knows it's the entire nasal capacitor they're the nasal capacity is so huge mm-hmm there's really no and these guys are atheists they're saying you know how can we possibly evolve this gigantic nasal capacity but many other species we see in the fossil record or any other species we see on earth and they said we can't we can't come on nothing evolves beyond I wouldn't use the word species that's kind of a nebulous nebulous term because a dog and a wolf and a coyote are different species but they're still inter fertile they're the same kind I'd stick with what the Bible says the animals bring forth after their kind a whoreson of the interpret kind do you think horses and zebras evolve I think horses and zebras are the same kind I interpret kind like the Bible says they're able to bring forth the ones that were originally able to reproduce are they created kinds now there's been variations from there so how far up do you put the kinds I mean I just don't know what does anybody knows that and that would be a good field of research for science to get into would you be willing to take a pass Sierra I think with some areas I'll see what we have here is we're trying to take a modern 20th century classification system you know started with carolus linnaeus has been refined many times and we're trying to force that on to the Bible now that's the mistake the Bible says they bring forth after their kind a horse and a zebra probably are the original created kind one of the zoos in I believe is one Hawaii they were had a wall pen they crossed a killer whale and a dolphin they have their many zoos have had a tygon or a liger across a time a tiger and a lion they probably are the original created kind yes but they can't reproduce that kind well the weapon open did it after 10 years it produced a baby not the liger I don't know about the licker see now but even if they get where they came you reduce your arguing intramurally and the big argument is from the outside does the fossil record support the evolutionists or not I don't know it's animals man yeah I never got a chance to respond to the caveman I don't think but well I mean let's let's stick with the outside world here for a moment and the fact is those folks out there are simply saying both you guys are wrong the fact is evolution did they did take place but I think most of our students recognize that even people like Gould and Harvard are making a shift here punctuated equilibrium is really going against what they originally started out with all of a sudden it just appears in the record what comment on this but it's an excellent point because what Gould and Niles Eldredge are trying to do is make evolution work where the mathematics tells us that is the lowest possible probability I mean when the species population drops down to a few thousand you get a zero probability of evolutionary advance when you look at the fossil record where do you see the evidence for the so-called transitional forms this creatures like whales and the horses and these are creatures with population levels so small generation times so long body size is so huge they have a zero probability for evolutionary events or even lower than our probability for evolutionary advance yet we see these all these transitions my explanation for that god loves horses and whales he knows because of their huge size and small populations they're gonna go extinct rapidly when he did that when they do he makes new ones when you guys are on campus what do you say to the kids that have grown up thinking that evolution is proven by the fossil record what what are the things that you use give them a mathematical model I mean one of the things we're trying to do in university campuses is say if you're gonna work in this discipline you have to integrate mathematics with biology here's a principle most mutations or many more mutations are negative than those that are beneficial the best you get is a ratio of 10,000 to 1 in other words mutations will tend to why the species to extinction before it as an opportunity to naturally evolve and less it as a truly enormous population size more than a quadrillion a body size less than one centimeter and a generation time briefer in three months now you can go to the field biologists where do you see speciation going on in the real world they only see it for those species that match the mathematical limits those that don't all these see extinctions right and you've got some great illustrations on DNA to Kent in terms of people say well the DNA is similar between this and that therefore they have they call that the transitional forms but talk to that a little bit well he mentioned about God loves horses and whales so when they go extinct God creates new ones this is the type of thing that makes me so nervous about people following his teachings because there are so many things like this thrown in there that just are simply unsupported by Scripture Psalm 104 the Bible says God finished his creation he was finished I don't think God's creating new species all the time I think it was done and when he looked at it by the way I agree God has stopped creating new species when he created Eve that's when he went into his period of rest and how long ago was that I would argue that it's probably the neighborhood of thirty to forty thousand years ago okay we could argue that for a long time but I think it was 6,000 years ago just like the Bible obviously teaches but you're both using genealogies to say there's an end in terms of parameters so you're both basically on the same point at that spot that God stopped so you're saying that this this origination of new whales new horses and so on was before that was before that correct okay just like Psalm one what horse speak let's come back please because we only got about two minutes here and that's this thing of the DNA because the kids hear this a whole lot in terms of there's similarity in DNA so therefore a man is similar to this that and the other and they use that as kind of a transitional deal the reason DNA is similar in so many different animals is we all have the same designer Microsoft Word and Microsoft PowerPoint have millions of similarities that doesn't prove they both evolved from Morse code the same guys are writing the programs that's all and the same God designed the DNA of all the animals and the DNA is incredibly flexible there's a range of humans there's a right wide range of dogs she could Great Danes and chihuahuas and they probably had a common ancestor it was a dog that doesn't prove a dog and a banana are related so the DNA code is just so so incredible it must be an incredibly smart designer take a moment can you remember some of the numbers on some things that just show the dissimilarity there's no transitional forms going up oh yeah I've got a chart on my website doctor Dino dot-com people can look at you know penicillin only has two chromosomes so that must have evolved first you know and then fruit flies have eight so they must be the next form you know now a housefly and a tomato both have 12 chromosomes so obviously they're identical twins and it's hard to tell the difference wean the house flying a tomato you know a opossum a redwood tree and a kidney bean all have 22 chromosomes identical triplets you know opossum redwood tree couldn t bean average scientists can't tell them apart you know there's monkeys or chimpanzees have more chromosomes than we do man has 46 tobacco has 48 so if we keep evolving we're all gonna be a tobacco plant I mean the whole idea is absurd and how they believe this I don't know but they just don't like the idea that God created the world okay obvious he did we're going to take a break we come back we're going to talk about what happened when Adam sinned was there death in the world before Adam sinned and did the law of entropy only take place when Adam sinned or was it in place before that all right because it has a bearing on whether God created in 24 hours or God created over long periods of time so stick with us we'll take a break we'll be right back [Applause] all right welcome we're talking about a very interesting topic and our the universe of the earth billions of years old or just thousands of years old our Genesis 1 and 2 in the Bible compatible with contemporary scientific evidence my guests are dr. Hugh Ross who received his PhD in astronomy from the University of Toronto did postdoctoral research on quasars at Caltech and dr. Kent Hovind who received his PhD in education writing his doctoral dissertation on creation versus evolution and we're at a stage that's very interesting want to talk about entropy the law of entropy via the Bible and before we do that I'd like you to define what the positions are you're both Christians but you interpret the word day differently in Genesis and Kent first of all start us off what is it that you are saying what's your position my position is the very obvious literal scriptural position that everybody would get if they just read the Bible God created everything in six days 24-hour days just like we know today any interpretation other than that requires a leader to tell you what it means and you end up with a cult I believe that's what dr. Ross has is the teaching that requires him to tell us what the Bible says and you establish a position of authority for yourself and I get real nervous about that the Bible says real clear to God made everything in six days there was no death before sin the flood in the days of Noah was a worldwide flood that completely destroyed the world about 4,400 years ago and I see no scientific reason and certainly no scriptural reason to believe anything other than what the obvious blind teaching of Scripture is all right here what's your position well I believe that the plain literal reading of the text is that it's six long periods of time ten creation accounts in the Bible it's not enough to take the Bible literally we must take it consistently when you try to make all ten creation accounts say the same thing it's quite obvious it's impossible interpreted as six 24-hour days that must be six long periods of time as I mentioned previously we're talking about a universe that's expanding the Bible clearly teaches that and stars and planets are only possible the universe has been expanding for billions of years if it's just thousands all you get is hydrogen gas all right before we actually hit the topic Christians in the church have different positions you are telling me that the press between Presbyterian Church on their internet has put a statement after how long researching this topic yeah I got this statement here it's 92 pages it's a result of the group of theologians studying the text for a two-year period and they all agree in biblical inerrancy that evolution can't take place it's got to be supernatural creation they take the Bible literally unless the context indicates otherwise and they said there are four positions that follow them the pail of biblical orthodoxy now you got the de-age interpretation which I represent you got the calendar day view which can't represent you have the analogical days then you have the framework of offices and so they're recommending that all four views be encouraged and be taught within their churches yeah would you guys agree that we need to have this debate in the church oh absolutely yes everything and and the fact is is that I know both of you have had folks make accusations against you Hugh you've even been called a non-christian because you hold to the particular view that you do I've been called a lot worse than that well and sheep's clothing and and can I listen to some of your debates we've actually debated university professors on campus and it was a hot time you did marvelously well it's just among Christians we want them to think about what the text is saying and let's let me ask you both this question what what do we do with science and scripture in other words how as Christians do we approach it some people say the Bible says that I believe it I don't care what science says there's other people that say well we've got the Bible if it opens up the door then science can lead us as to the interpretation others would say forget what the Bible says science first then you know everything else will jam it in there what do you guys think I think you have to make a distinction between the record of nature and science and the words of the Bible and theology theology and science can definitely clash and con for debt because human interpretation is involved but God created the universe he's the one who inspired the words of the Bible it's a god that can't lie the record of nature can never contradict the words of the Bible but where we do see contradiction between science and theology we need to look for human misinterpretation but I welcome these disagreements because it's a wonderful way to ferret out the interpretations that may exist on either of both sides what do you think I agree we need to look for human misinterpretation but what who does he looks for human misinterpretation of the Bible as opposed to looking for him and misinterpretation of the scientific evidence I look for both well what I've seen in your books that I've read is you're quick to jump on some idea that maybe the Bible didn't really mean what it clearly teaches and you've already decided I think you've been crippled by your education because you think the universe is billions of years old I mean that's that's a given in your mind that's an inflexible and that's not that that's not logical to come at the Bible study that way oh wait wait wait the fact is is that don't we all start with some pre structure everybody that's yeah okay I'm saying I will clearly taught that it was young I would believe that in spite of my astronomy what I see is the Bible teaching and just as emphatically as a scientific writer that is not what let's go to you pick a spot where nobody's heard of the Bible just pick out 5,000 people say read this please zero out of 5,000 we're gonna come back like he Bellino Kent that's right one little grandma in Arkansas I forgot one out of 5,000 no nope the early church fathers sure okay the Hebrew calendar says this is the year 57 95 or something like that the Hebrews believed the creation was about 6,000 years ago well point is when you read the writings of the early church fathers they wrote 2,000 pages on the six days of creation more than any other texts in the Bible you talk about origin I'm talking about Stan yeah you read some of the other things those guys believed - yeah I'm gonna stick with what the Bible says I don't care what any early church when you say oh stick with what the Bible says so take take the area of eschatology take the area of church government take the area of baptism take the area of predestination okay there's a lot of disagreement in the church on that that doesn't mean that they're not Christians and the fat is the Bible itself has to be the standard the question is do we I mean the guys of the biblical inerrancy thing went around the circle on this thing for for days and days and days all right and people like Francis Schaeffer Gleeson Archer you know Walter Kaiser Norman Geisler they all looked at this and the fact is they took this this day age position they recognize other people took your position but they kept the door open because of the fact is that they saw that there was credible biblical evidence that opens that door so that the scientific evidence has a chance of getting in there all right you're doing the same thing he was doing though you're confusing science with the idea the idea that the earth is billions of years old it is true we see stars that doesn't prove they're billions of years old yes it does see there's right here's where the problem is you like we have talked to any astrologers abandonar this year we can go look at Grand Canyon we can put in it we can make three columns here a fact Grand Canyon exists there are two interpretations it is it took billions of years to form or form very quickly and in the flood of the days of Noah well he's confusing and I think you just did to John you confused the interpretation with the fact you got to be real careful that there's another way of approaching and that is let's say I'm all wrong in my view okay and you start off with coming to the Bible first thing I would do is what I'm looking at eschatology or whether I'm looking at predestination or whether I'm looking at Jesus saying you know you have to be a little child to come into the kingdom of God sure the fact is these have meanings and the text itself has to interpret that for you when you say have other Christians come to this position yeah guys like Francis Schaeffer who led the way in terms of apologetics and trying to reach non-christians he held this view guys like Gleeson archerd that do know these all these languages they were they were thrilled to see this they've written the the lexicons and so on they're saying these words allow them that door they're not saying that therefore because the door is open that this is what science is saying look anybody that had a few 500 years ago it said our bible view and our science view match up the fact is it be wrong today because science looks like it changes every hour around here all right and they used to teach universe was a different number and now he was saying 17 billion 10 years 17 well that's the number I see in your book fourteen point nine billion Oh fourteen point nine service a half billion now twenty years from now when they pick a new number he's gonna be left out in the cold because he's put so much emphasis on this Big Bang Theory and so much emphasis on this billions of your stuff that when this changes he's gonna look silly 1905 the official age of the earth I've got the textbooks was 2 billion years today slow in 6 that's still a lot older than what you're prepared to concede from 2 billion to 4.6 billion I don't know the guy who wrote the 2 billion was Edwin Hubble if you read his paper 1929 he cautioned people outside of the field to look at this as anything more than a demonstration the universe has expanded over billions of years because as said his data points are really noisy this needs to be done with greater precision okay we've done that with greater precision now we got the number down to better than 10% wait a couple years we'll get it down to 5% you're convinced the earth is 4.6 billion years old and that's within 10% it's better than that it's within 1/10 of a percent 0.57 billion plus or minus 0.01 this kind of this is what magicians do is they dazzle the audience with these numbers you know why watch this over here well there's a magic trick the difference is is that if the scientific community is using every which way to try to establish that but see why would we be against the fact of at least looking at their evidence oh I think we should but see the confusion comes when you tie the interpretation to this to the fact yes Grand Canyon is there one group says it took billions of years I say wait a minute now the top of Grand Canyon is higher than the place where the river enters the Canyon rivers don't flow uphill River didn't make that Canyon yeah let's talk about the flood net a little bit later but the fact is in terms of I think you were saying let's go back to that speed of light thing because we we missed that any other program we do see the stars though the fact is is I think you said now that there are quite a few ways that you've measured speed of light right I think 13 different tests that scientists have made in the speed of light because it's been challenged within the scientific community itself and of course if the speed of light gets messed up the nine Stein's relativity theory goes down the tubes string theory goes down the tubes all kinds of things go down the tube but give us a little background of why now you feel so sure about the speed of light okay when astronomers measure hyperfine splitting their measuring the velocity of light when the light left that star or galaxy and astronomers have been routinely making these measurements on millions of different objects what we see is the identical velocity of light that we measure here on earth we've been able to do this to galaxies as far away as 14 billion light years so the velocity of light has not changed over the past 14 billion years that's a direct measurement now we can combine that with a theoretical measurement e equals mc-squared it makes C different is gonna affect E or him the velocity of light is a little bit higher for atom than it is for us he gets incinerated by the heat of the Sun or he don't have the elements to make atom in the first place digestion human digestion depends on the velocity of light we note that Adam and Eve were eating in the Garden of Eden therefore the velocity of light had to be the same for them as it is for us and some source talking and they let Kent get in here the fact is apparently there's certain lines that spread out as it gets to us now you're talking about the idea that maybe doing dish makes the proposition for example that light didn't come from the stars and galaxies God sent it from an intervening point only 6,000 light years out but we can prove that's not true through direct observation as a beam of light travels through space it passes through dust and gas what the dust will do is read in the continuum it's kind of likely to see that the moon during a forest fire it gets redder and redder as a smoke gets denser and denser and as it goes through gas clouds those gas clouds of movements and that's going to Doppler broaden the spectral lines and therefore a test of whether or not the objects came from the stars and galaxies are the more distant objects more reddened in the continuum and broader inner spectral lines and it's a direct proportion the farther way the object is the broader the spectral lines and the deeper the read of the continuum which all means what means the light must have come from the stars and galaxies rather than from some intervene and we measuring that light you get a time of if it came from those distant galaxies and the light must have been traveling for billions of years because the velocity of light we can measure and prove theoretically did not change I forgot about a minute 30 left look we did last minute 30 go for it I recommend that anybody watching this called Duane Gish and say did you really say that because I bet I got 25 or 30 letters and calls from people saying Hugh Ross misquoted me he didn't you know he did it is not correct he said that my presence there's a long website on Answers in Genesis you know a long expose if you what about the flight coming last June of 2000 at Princeton University they speeded light up to 300 times the speed of light in February of this year at Harvard University dr. howl from Denmark's slowed light down to one mile per hour I said I think North is it going or not although there are three things to consider with starlight we do not know that the speed of light has always remained constant all through history the way we measure light now is with an atomic clock using the wavelength of a cesium 133 atom so if light is slowing down your clock is slowing down at the same rate you have a rubber ruler you're never going to notice it so thank you finish then secondly I mentioned earlier you can't tell the distance to these stars 14 billion light-years away they might be they probably are but we can't measure that and it's silly for us for humans little humans on earth to say we know the distance to that star 14 billion light-years away it can't be done it's high school rate the God that I worship made a full-grown man a full-grown Garden he didn't make two babies and put him in the garden and say here's a package of seeds go plant on quick you know there was the fruit already on the trees that's not deceptive it's necessary it doesn't work otherwise and the reason God made the Stars was for signs and for seasons so Adam could see them God made the Stars and the light all simultaneously or the light traveled faster my God is not limited by stuff like that and I get real concerned that maybe we're talking about different gods here when we talk about let's let's say in this segment here because we'd want to end it right here the fact is is that respond to that okay astronomers view the credibility the young earth is being much weaker than that for a flat earth wait-wait-wait just this blanket statement astronomers say as if he's speaking for all astronomers I just spent the last three hours with Danny Faulkner who is an astronomer who would love to debate you by the way sure and would you be willing to do that definitely awfully because please keep going he says you're wrong the earth is only 6,000 years old they are based on the Bible he's admitted to me that if you look at the astronomical evidence there's no case he's been arguing in print for years that young earth creationist need to pay attention to astronomy because they got a profound challenge there my point was this given that the astronomical community and I'll accept Danny Faulkner I'll give that see right away you're assuming everybody's on your side that's just simply not true hang on given that there's so many well-known astronomers who put in print the statement that I've just stated shouldn't you at least talk to those astronomers and determine why they view the astronomical evidence for a young earth to be willing to read anything anything on the topic I'm willing to talk to anybody mm-hm but I think you've got some potential velocity of light I mean clearly there's no case for the velocity of light varying is a great case for the speed of light I taught physics we used to measure the speed of light in the hallway with rotating mirrors and a laser beam do you believe it astronomers can measure the velocity of light we look at distance stars is if the base for measuring the speed of light is the atomic clock I think it's done understand you have a rubber ruler it's so there are thirteen different ways to measure the speed of light there are many different ways to measure the speed so the fact that clocks is only one do they all agree they all agree same answer to ten places the decimal at all different distances is all different if that's true what does it mean that's being measured here on earth no we don't know that the speed of light you've never made you know been to the moon you've never measured the speed of light out there we don't know that the speed of the speed of light may be consistent I don't know my point is we know what light is is it a wave a particle a photon what is give me a jar of it paint it red nobody knows what it is what do you think what is light we know what light is what is it it's a photon which has both a wave property and a particle property it's the principle of quantum mechanics well you're giving it a name but that's not telling me what it is while a white packet is a yeah its ziploc bag or what okay we're talking about quantum you believe that quantum mechanics is true well not all young earth creation is do I don't know what your position is I guess I'd have to get the question phrase more clearly where exactly what do you mean Einstein's theory was that the speed of light is a constant time is the variable maybe he was wrong maybe time is the constant and light is the variable okay the velocity of light as Einstein stated it was four at vacuum mean examples you gave are not vacuums where the velocity of light traveled different rates it travels a hundred eighty six thousand miles per second but in a vacuum and it's a physical entity no a wave peak can obviously travel fast and velocity of light in fact you could have the physical object carrying the light moving at just two miles an hour and yet the peak of the wave could go ten times the velocity of light so you're misrepresenting Einstein or relativity when you say that just because a light pulse goes fast and velocity of light that disproves the whole idea of variable speed of light you realize it's people how much how much doctrine you are hanging on this one idea you've already come to the conclusion the universe is billions of years old and now you're gonna try to force this book to say that no I get it independently from the text you wouldn't have got that had you gone to school in some other country Laura the Hindus or some other you would have covered in a church fathers figured it out long before the astronomers got into the game yeah that let's let's then shut it down here because the fact is is I think we got our point across so where you're coming from okay in terms of light and what we're gonna do in our next program is we will continue it I still want to get to this thing of when did entropy begin did it begin at the beginning of the universe the Big Bang or did it start only when Adam sinned so please stick with us let's take a break today on the John Ankerberg show we invite you to listen to a debate on science in the Bible our topic are the universe and the earth billions of years old or just thousands of years old does the information in Genesis chapter one and to agree with contemporary scientific evidence my guest star astronomer dr. Hugh Ross an educator dr. Kent Hovind we invite you to join us for this special debate on the John Ankerberg show welcome we're talking with our guest dr. Hugh Ross representing the old Earth days creationist viewpoint dr. Kent Hovind representing the young earth creationist viewpoint our topic is our the universe nearthe billions of years old or just 6,000 years old also our Genesis 1 and 2 compatible with contemporary scientific evidence and right now we're talking at an interesting spot and that is in terms of the Bible as well as science when did entropy the second law of thermodynamics come into place did it come into place when God created created it created everything at the Big Bang or when God created it on can't you have to tell me first day or when Adam sinned then I say what in the world does that have to do with it well the question comes up Romans chapter 5 verse 12 what the Apostle Paul talks about when he says therefore just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin in this way death came to all men because all sinned did death come into the world only at the moment that Adam sinned well if it did then the fact is that the days have to be 24-hour periods of time why because you've got the animals and the plants or are you saying that death does not apply to the animals and the plants the animals and plants dying we're talking about entropy so the stars burn down before Adam sinned is digestion taking place am I going the right direction here start me off would you okay are you referring to Romans chapter 8 which says the entire creation is subjected to the law of decay that means all of the universe with all of its space-time dimensions and so I would interpret that that the second law of thermodynamics has been in effect since the creation as you pointed out you've got stars before the fall of man and after the fall of man stars are extremely sensitive to the laws of physics including the laws of thermodynamics stars are impossible without the second law of thermodynamics it's gravity and electromagnetism you could Adam and Eve eating before the fall and after the fall again extremely sensitive to the laws of physics including thermodynamics what happened the Falls we see in Genesis 3 there's a humanity change not the world the curse was that there would be more pain not paying for the first time there'd be more work not work for the first time Adam after all was commanded to work the Garden of Eden before he sinned therefore we get the continuous operation of the laws of physics and as an astronomer I can tell you if there was any change in the laws of physics we would see a discontinuity as he looked back in time we see no such discontinuity to find death then ok Romans 5:12 the speaking about human death that's when human death came into effect for the first time notice the text says death through sin only human beings amongst all species of life can experience death through sin and then Paul closes it off by saying death through sin was visited upon all human beings he's careful to exclude the plants and the animals as he does in 1st Corinthians 15:22 22 again he limits it to humanity and so yes there was no human death until a fall of Adam and Eve but that does not exclude plant and animal death and haeth Adam and Eve are eating obviously plants are dying ok cats start me off terms of what did entropy start what happened when Adam and Eve sinned what kind of death are we talking about the earth was created and heaven of heavens and earth everything was created in six literal 24-hour days apparently entropy came in when Adam and Eve disobeyed God it came in as a result of the fall before that had they not sinned they would have live forever and of all the things that he Ross teaches that I would object to this one is probably the most serious this one I would say borders on heresy because it leads right into why did Christ die on the cross if there's already death in the world see his philosophy is God created a world where the Lions eat the zebras suffering and an agony and is its normal and then when you read Genesis 1:31 at the end of the chapter God book everything's that it was very good if that's his idea very good then we have a very different God which leads to the question why did Christ die on the cross the Bible says one man Adam brought death into the world and that first you just read is Romans chapter five and verse 12 but it also says in Romans 5:14 the nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses and he says it didn't affect the plant and animal life and yet the Bible clearly says because of Adam's sin thorns and thistles are gonna grow it certainly affected the plant life animals died a sheep died lambs died because of man sin all through the scripture you see the animals suffering because of man sinned this is heresy and it bothers me because the more I've prayed about this and thought about this it makes me wonder if we if we have the same God we're using the same term but I see the same thing in other cults you know they use the same terminology but they mean something different yeah let's let's slow that down the fact is why does it mean you have another god to interpret the fact of sin well his God is a God who created suffering and and misfits and death and let's let's back that up so what you're saying is that on day four five before Adam okay even if their 24-hour periods of time was the Sun burning down were plants being eaten by animals were whales eating fish as far as eating plants I don't know that I would argue that plants are alive in the same sense that animals and people are plant a plant is a complex self-replicating food source and you don't have to kill a plant when you eat it you get into the question of you know it's gonna strain it the gnats here and swallow the camel of you know saying well maybe the cells died or something like that you guess you first have to define life what the scripture defines his life and then decide was their death the Bible clearly says where death came until Adam sinned okay Scripture attributes life and death to plants and lower animals not just to human beings to animals I'm sure it does but it says the grass withers the flower fades though I can show you four places in the Bible where actually uses the word death the Hebrew word for death mute for the plants or flies for frogs not even to animals not plants plants okay I got a list here you want to see much scripture listed right here he's missing the bigger point though in first Corinthians 15 it says the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death human death so you're adding to the Word of God here in the Bible for not curse on people only that read revelation Paul says to all men and he says death through sin he is the one who limits it to human death okay why did lambs die why did the Israelites sacrifice a lamb or an oxen is is that an example of an animal dying for man sin or assuming that all you know answering my question I'll hold it you're accusing me of heresy I believe you are yes sir okay and you're saying I mean I'm destroying the atonement doctrine of Christ I believe that's Prius what you're saying is that all shed blood of sheep is for atonement I don't agree with that what is are you putting words in my mouth when and where is that problem with death of plants and animals before the fall it's indeed not all shed blood is for atonement so it's not heresy lots of blood is shed that's not for atomic blood is shed in time of war it's my whole point well why are you charging me with hair securing apples and oranges here if you have death before sin you're saying this is the way God made it and when God looked at everything in Genesis 1:31 and looked at everything is that it's very good I don't think it's very good for the zebra to have the lion tear his guts out okay maybe we disagree on eschatology I believe the perfect creation the new creation of revelation 21 will replace the very good creation of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 there's a much superior creation it's coming yes it was good it was very good but it was not very good when the animals were being eaten by each other you're saying that was very good hang on that yes or no I'm disagreeing with you I would argue that conditions would be worse for the herbivores if you take the carnivores away that be greater suffering if there wasn't carnivorous sex oh yeah that's a roundabout way of answering the question yes you believe God originally designed it for the herbivores to be eaten by the carnival rekt okay there I disagree so strongly and I think that you really get into some some wild doctrines then well let's let me illustrate a that you eat you will die did he die on that day he died spiritually there are three kinds of death in the Bible but so he didn't die physically on that well if a day is like a thousand years you know nobody made it over a thousand so I yes he did in that sense he died physically he you know in that same he began to die right away that's probably when the second law was introduced so the fact is is that it's not necessarily talking about physical death there well let me ask you one question on the same topic yeah if Adam had not taken the fruit would he have eventually died anyway I think so let me let me try I've been thinking about both what you would say and I don't know what you're gonna say on this you but I've been thinking about that because it talks about the fact though you've got this this tree of life okay and you see you can't eat the tree of good and evil but the fact is you can eat of this tree of life it was expected that he would now after Adam sinned okay God put the chair of him at the gate so that he couldn't go back in apparently he could have eaten after even after he had sinned implying the fact is if he did he would have lived forever as a sinner so actually it was God's grace that he kicked them out so he would die physically to be redeemed and so on but but that would imply that he had to eat in the garden of that tree to stay alive which would imply to me that he could have died doesn't it well you got along several assumptions from the fact I mean you get several generations so wrapped up in 30 seconds and 30 seconds okay God created a perfect world there was no suffering there was no death it was man that messed it up death is an enemy the Bible says death is the last enemy that shall be destroyed the Bible says death reigned from Adam to Moses jesus said in matthew 19:4 the creation of male and female was the beginning to say that there was death before Adam's sin is heresy in my opinion and I don't know of a kind' way to say that which makes me which makes me worry for are we talking about the same God are we talking about the same salvation I don't know those questions that's between him and God okay the fall did not take place in the Garden of Eden it took place before the Garden of Eden Satan was the one that fell first not had him God knew ahead of time this is going to happen I believe in foreknowledge and predestination God recognizing that sin was going to come into the world through Satan and he gave Satan permission to invade the Garden of Eden that was God's purpose to let Satan and he didn't - and therefore God set up the laws of physics in advance to efficiently deal with sin so we can be ushered into a new creation where there will be different laws of physics and as Paul says it's going to be far greater than any of us can think or imagine it's not just a restored creation it's brand-new thanks guys and we're going to come back with a final word in just a moment you [Applause] I'm talking with our guests dr. Kent Hovind and dr. Hugh Ross about science and creation evolution we're talking about is the age of the earth billions of years old or just 6,000 years old and we're talking about how does all this square with the Genesis records been a very interesting talk when do questions and answers now from the audience and I can hardly wait to hear what these folks are going to ask now look one miss question is for dr. Hovind we know that you believe there are several areas where the science needs to be reinterpreted to agree with the words of the Bible but do you believe there's any instance where the traditional interpretation of the Bible needs to be adjusted to agree with the scientific evidence I guess I'd have to know what you mean by whose whose traditional interpretation of theology do you believe there's any instance where theology needs to be adjusted to agree with science well I don't know of any contradictions between the Bible and science I love the Bible I love science I taught it for years so between a lot of different theology you know theology is kind of a broad term I mean you're talking about Catholic theology and Mormon theology you know Presbyterian theology the more you read the Bible the quicker you become a Baptist basically is what happens well the given example about the fact that a thousand years ago some Christians thought the Bible taught that the world was flat I think oh you think you'd find if you studied that out it was some heathen they were teaching the earth is flat and a lot of Christians today get accused of believing things in the past the Bible clearly teaches the earth is round in Isaiah chapter with that so just because I mean I've always been oddballs I believe things that are you know not contrary to Scripture that's why we're having this debate tonight try to get you converted question yeah I have a two-part question for dr. Hovind sure the first of which is when do you believe we have a consistent or consistency with the exception of the miracles in the traditional laws of physics I believe God created everything in six days just like he said he did and things have been consistent except for a man's fall introducing entropy had it not been for Adam and Eve disobedience I believe there would have been no death in the world everything would have persisted forever so when exactly is your definition of consistency in the laws of physics in terms of time well right from the beginning I think if God created things and then he took his hands off and allowed them to run down that's not changing the laws of physics that's it's the same God God is the same yesterday today and forever he's not changed so you're in agreement then that the laws of physics have been consistent throughout God's existence including sermons God's existence now God is eternal see I would not try to put God into our laws God is not subject to time space and matter he's above and beyond and outside of all of those but I am looking for a specific definition from you is to when the laws of physics have been consistent because you have debated throughout as to how long the laws of light in terms of their properties of speed have been consistent so the Bible has commanded us to test everything and in order to do that we need a stable framework right so we need an indication from you I guess considering that you're the one proposing this theory as to when we can actually consider the environment of physics to be stable as far as from man's observation point it's been from the creation now see Jesus can walk on the water if he wants you can walk through the doors I mean these are these are contrary to the laws of physics but so you're trying to mix apples and oranges I think here God is not subject to the laws of physics he created them he's not subject to time this is not the year 2000 in heaven there is no time when did entropy enter the universe I would answer that I think entropy came in at the at the fall I wouldn't that's so far the best answer I would have you don't have a time frame since the fall the fall is probably a hundred years after the creation five thousand nine hundred years I wouldn't roll dogmatic on the date but yeah I box in Italy sure okay so that being the case if we look at let's say the most modern finds within Japan that indicate civilization dating back ten thousand years through clay figurines and things of that nature you can it is proven that the decay of carbon exceeds your six thousand year period by four thousand years now why would God do that I think you need begun from my seminar because on video number seven of my seminar series we cover that carbon dating is a far cry for an exact science they dug up a mammoth the front leg dated twenty one thousand years old the skin dated forty four thousand years old same animal I give lots of examples on my website doctor Dino calm where I explain how carbon dating works the problems associated with it the automatic assumptions that are built in and I sure wouldn't say they found a clay figurine in Japan is ten thousand years old therefore the Bible is wrong I would question the carbon data so you think that carbon dating is not valid I didn't say that I said carbon dating you get all kinds of wild numbers and you can carbon date the same object and get different numbers when they brought back the moon rocks they gave them to NASA dated I've got lots of different numbers from the same rock so you need to I can't take an hour to answer that question now but I can't answer the question carbon dating gives wild answers living snails will carbon date at twenty-seven thousand years old and I document all of this on my website you can see all that I've got a question going back to this deal on entropy and that is that if entropy did not happen until Adam sinned on the sixth day was there no burning down of the Sun on the fourth day third day etc if the Sun is burning there's two theories about how the Sun burns you know by gravitational collapse therefore it's burning up its fuel and therefore the other one is just nuclear fusion it's just you know take very little energy would go a long time I don't know how God would have done that forever both involve entropy yeah the Sun is burning that's no question how God would have done that you know forever the fact that we see so many things in entropy like the moon leaving us a couple inches a year or the human population getting more genetic load all of the things from entropy indicate the universe is not billions of years old maybe you know let's talk about that one too the fact of in the fact of the moon pulling away you got the morning a couple of examples number one of the moon pulling away couple inches every year therefore if you take it all the way back to the beginning the earth ought to be young alright is there something wrong with that idea definitely he's assuming that the spiraling away of the moon from the earth is linear no astronomer believes is linear Mutants laws of motion prove that it can't possibly be linear we use those laws you discover that it's consistent with the mean separating from zum-zum close to the earth above four and a quarter billion years ago and so the spiraling way the moon is consistent with an Old Earth interpretation not a young Earth's interpretation I think it's good to point out too if you're saying no entropy until the fall of man that also means no gravity no electromagnetism no nuclear physics would be taking place those are all intertwined with entropy so you get a complete breakdown of the laws of physics in the young earth view at the fall of Adam which I have argued contradicts what the scripture clearly teaches it's also something that can't possibly be hidden from the astronomers view through the telescope as far as when entropy came into the world I don't know I suspect it was at the fall of Adam the Bible says God looked at everything at the end of chapter one and said it was very good Bible tells us very clearly in Exodus 20:11 God said I want you to rest on the seventh because I made everything in six days everything in heaven and earth the sea and all that in them is and if the average layman cannot understand that verse then the Bible is incapable of being understood well I agree with that it was done in six days you see this is you see that in the Westminster Confession that God created the universe in six days notice the Westminster Confession doesn't say six 24-hour days just says six days I could add that form if you'd like I would prefer you don't because I don't think they would have I mean there's a reason why they didn't stick that in because they'd never been to my seminar all right let's go to another question here before we get a question of the audience that is let's let's pick up the sing of moondust because it's come up in quite a few conversations we've had in the past and that is that at one time folks that were scientists thought that the amount of moon dust that was being collected on the moon would be over one hundred and forty six feet in fact the space pod was getting ready for that and that was calculated by the number of years that it was supposed to be up there in terms of being very very old well they got there it was what to two inches or something all right so what has taken place what does the lack of moon dust one way or the other prove well the moon dust experiment was first attempted in 1960 Hans Peterson I've got the paper he can check it out he took a filter four feet off the ground on Mauna Kea assumed all a dust coming through the filter was cosmic dust but he states in this paper quite obviously that's not true there's gonna be a lot of birth dust circulating through this so this is simply a limit he encouraged in his paper that the experiment be done with balloon experiments better yet satellite experiments those were done a few years later where they discovered he was off by at least a factor of 1,100 times the measurements they got from the satellites predicted that four and a quarter billion years of accumulation of dust on the moon should give you about 60 millimetres when they went to the moon that's what they found so it's consistent with an Old Earth interpretation not a young earth interpretation what do you think I think you get an example where your prejudice your preconceived idea determines your observations the dust from the moon is only one part out of 67 is really from outer space most of it is regurgitated lunar soil when an object hits the moon at high speed blows up a bunch of other dust so I think if you figure in the one to 67 factor there's a whole lot of these equations on Walt Browns website creation science.com he says 1.2 billion years ago alright oh yeah that was about the distance to the mill he indicated says there should be about a thousand feet of dust on the moon in 4.6 billion years figuring in the one to sixty-seven factor I don't know how much dust should be on the moment I know there wasn't much and I think that's consistent with a young earth model that the whole universe was created in six days just like that's it I have no problem you can't get 60 millimeters in moon dust in such a brief period of time see you if you the problem you have you is you're stuck with this uniformitarian assumptions the Bible predicted people in the latter days would come that would teach the way things are happening now is where they've always been happening 2nd Peter chapter 3 and you're an example of this we see the moon dust in 1960 and 1970 in 1980 we checked the dust today and assume well that's why it's always been this is uniformitarianism this was Charles Lyell's problem and several times in the last previous debates Hugh has referred to you know the fossil record or the geologic column well I taught her science for years you can only find that dumb geologic column one place in the world that's in the textbooks doesn't exist Charles Lyell made up the whole thing all those later or some other people helped but all those layers of rock that we see were formed during the flood in the days of Noah I've got pictures on my website of petrified trees standing up running through a whole bunch of different layers you're misrepresenting the field what geophysicist and geologists believe is that it's a combination of catastrophism and uniformitarianism you do this consistently and I wish you'd stop and think about what you're doing and find a secular geologist that doesn't endorse catastrophism they all endorse it fine I can find lots of geologists that don't endorse the idea that the that do believe all those layers were deposited in a flood I would agree but many floods not just one no just one big flood form nearly all the layers and so in one sense it doesn't matter what any geologist says where does God's Word say it's real clear your idea of a local flood in the days of Noah then you're assuming that all of these layers of rock that we see all over the world were formed slowly over billions of years so there's all okay nearly all there's just no difference between what you teach and what the evolutionists teach and your teaching is going to destroy people's faith in God's Word and it's going to not lead people to up to the Lord it's kinda like and young Earth Creationism is the point let's hit that I mean you know just gotta stop there the fact is why in other words when you have people like francis schaeffer norm Geisler police and archer bruce walki and a whole lot of folks like that that may disagree on a 24-hour period of time you can't accuse them of being non evangelistic not standing for the inspiration inerrancy of the word of god right you say they disagree but you can't accuse them in terms of motive and i think also the fact is that right along this line there's one verse that that is an interesting one I've been thinking about it excuse me for butting in on your time here sound 19 one and two says and you've both quoted this in your ear stuff the heavens declare the glory of God the skies proclaim the work of his hands day after day they pour forth speech night after night they display knowledge there's no speech or language where their voice is not heard their voice goes out into all the earth their words to the ends of the world now my question is this is that is the message that's being conveyed just that God is the creator and these guys are spectacular or is that does the message that they are proclaiming in terms of distance and years is that also a true message we come back to this thing the speed of light how you measure the distance to the stars and so on what do you think well twice the psalmist says that heavens declare the righteousness of God silac argue that the psalmist's are trying to make the point that the heavens declare not just that a God exists but the God the God of the Bible exists you know and I've written in my books if you look at the record of nature in the universe you see that it must be a transcendent being transcends ten space-time dimensions matter and energy we can identify that this God is trillions of trillions of trillions of times etc more powerful than we human beings in this capacity design and create likewise more intelligent more knowledgeable and I think the real distinctive is that we can demonstrate from that record that God is caring and loving now of all of God's are the religions of the world which one transcends ten space-time dimensions which one reveals himself as trillions of trillions of trillions of trillions of times more creative more powerful more knowledgeable more intelligent more caring and loving than we human beings you're really left with just the dot of the Bible now my problem of the young-earth interpretation is all that evidences erased the heavens do not declare the glory of God what about this appearance of age Kent well Adam how old was Adam when God made him brand new did he look brand new he looked brand new you look like a sperm or an egg or a fertilized embryo or this way you and I have liver spots on her skin fat the teenagers in this audience have liver spots on their skin right they're not brand new and he examined him up close using medical methods but I believe that when God created Adam yes he was tall fully capable fully functional but he was brand-new no liver spots no chip teeth no gray hair no baldness he was brand new because when God creates sets how he creates he doesn't create with the appearance of beige he never creates with the appearance of age that that is the appearance of age and look at him I mean he's tall enough to walk talk get married first day you're a Sumi comes from a womb the text tells us he doesn't come from the womb of a woman I know especially created by God for us to the earth and Eve was made from Adam's rib and not his side like you said it was just a rib is what the Bible says but they were full grown fully mature human beings in a full grown garden they didn't have to wait three or four years for the trees to produce I don't agree they were mature I believe that both of them are brand-new when they stated they speak God gave him that capacity so they came pre-programmed from the hand of God fully formed fully functional they were fully functional if the chicken or the egg God makes the chip he makes the chicken I agree now why can't you do that with the Stars what is your well because the text doesn't use the word bara with respect to the Stars it does for Adam and Eve but it doesn't use that word for the stars well I showed you where it does in chapter verse chapter 1 it says God let us make man in our image the next verse says God created man it uses them interchangeably and there's hundreds of example I'm not agreeing that it's interchangeable I believe it's referring to two different characteristics of humanity the older the spirit within s is brand-new never existed before in the animal kingdom on earth it happened for the first time with Adam now there's parts of us that are not brand new we have physical bodies just like the other animals have physical bodies therefore the text doesn't use bara to refer to our physical capacity it uses the word of saw it still attributes to God the miraculous God himself performed a miracle of taking the dust of the earth which wasn't brand new it's been around for a while few days right or well okay whatever you say yeah a few days I agree it's been six days has been sitting around so that's six long days but with respect to the spirit that's brand new that never existed in God's earthly creation until the sixth day just like with the animals when it says on the fifth day God created the soulless creatures notice there again it uses both verbs a saw bra there's something about those creatures is brand new that never existed before but before that there were animals without a soul without a consciousness of life er well I mean you're getting into the debate here what does Genesis mean by the soullessness of these bird mammal creatures and I know sometimes we see in the New Testament for example it's connoted with the spirit but there's referring to human beings you look at the context I believe but it's speaking about us how birds and mammals are uniquely endowed by God with mind will and emotions so they can form relationships with us human beings I know about your kids that my kids have had these pet insects when they were young but they gave up on them because there's no relationship there they're dumb whereas with the birds and mammals they can maintain a relation so there is something distinctive about those creatures I agree with that I think we're way off topic for the question it was asked though well go back to the original one there John all right let's try it here my questions about the canopy theory you've been critical dr. Hovind of dr. Ross because he makes a lot of use of 20th century science but I never hear young earth creationists talk much about the origin of canopy theory and as best I can determine it was developed by a man named Isaac Newton Vail he was a Quaker he was a self-taught geologist I'm not sure he was a Christian he was an evolutionist he believed the earth was millions of years old and this 19th century discredited theory has been embraced by young earth creationists aren't you doing the very same thing that you have criticized dr. Ross for doing well first of all you accused me of being against 20th century science that is simply not true I love science I've seen no scientific evidence to go against this book I see a lot of to 20th century interpretations of scientific facts that are contrary but you again you're confusing the interpretation that somebody gives to the fact here's Grand Canyon how did it get there some guy says billions of years okay now you can't make his interpretation part of the fact that it's there all we know is it's there so I am NOT against science I love science okay I've not seen any scientific evidence to contradict the young earth creationist model an instantaneous creation six days I've never seen any scientific evidence I see evolutionary interpretations that contradict that and there's no question the Bible has a lot of lot of conflict with evolution and I think the Bible has a lot of conflict with Hugh Ross as teachings but there's no conflict we in science in the Bible now if we explain the existence of stars anybody interpretations question here critical of science as far as the canopy theory I don't know who invented it I never heard of this guy you mentioned that's fine this is the rank tears of this book the fact is I read the Bible and I cease and I look at science and I see several interesting things insects are found in the fossil record that are huge insects breathe through their skin there's a real problem as an insects gets larger at breeze through spiracles in its skin as you increase the size of an insect the surface area to volume ratio changes dramatically and you have a problem where it can't get enough oxygen and we find dragonfly they found one in Italy here recently with a 50 inch wingspan well the 50 inch dragonfly couldn't possibly fly today something was different two-foot grasshopper fossils are found 18-inch cockroach fossils in Germany last summer they found this summer they found an 8 and a half foot centipede fossil something was different on this planet because insects today cannot get that size because of the surface area to volume ratio problem you just don't have enough skin to absorb the oxygen they need plus the flight you know pterodactyls are found with 50 foot wingspan they couldn't fly today all right sum it up something was different in the earth in the atmosphere amber is found that has 30% oxygen in it in air bubbles today we have 21% something was different the Bible says there was water above the firmament that's all I can say I I clearly stayed in my seminar it's called the canopy theory it's gone whatever it was it fell down at the time of the flood I couldn't prove it it's just a theory do you want to comment well I have in my office a book written by a young earth creationist it's a thesis looking at 100 different canopy models and he admits as a young earth creationist that every one of them is scientifically flawed and says the young earth community right now doesn't have a viable canopy theory and for the very reasons I mentioned in my book you can't keep the things stable refreshed I remember then what are you saying that the text says well I believe that the text is saying that there was a fully functional water cycle from the second creation day onward may as I look at Genesis 2 I see two Hebrew words had Matar rain and mist as you look at the lexical definitions it's simply a matter degree ones referring to bigger liquid drops of water ones referring to smaller liquid drops of water and as a geologist friend of mine point out we have fossil evidence of falling raindrops in shale and sandstone rocks that go back before 10 million years rain was here and would also fit the whole idea of the covenant theology when God uses something to sign one of his covenants he always picks something familiar within the environment to sign that with like water baptism or food and wine and therefore there must have been rain and rainbows before the flood for God to use that as a covenant signature that question okay this is directed to dr. Ross but first for dr. Hovind I have studied Hebrew and dr. Ross does an admirable job he's done his homework we've talked personally about some of these things and yet this is directed because we do have some differences and so dr. Ross with in relation to the word Yom used in the Old Testament 359 times it is linked with a number numerical index all but a few times like Hosea 6-2 it refers to a literal 24-hour or solar day sure so the evidence seems to support a 24-hour day how would you deal with this well what how would deal with it is to make the point that those 300 plus references you've found are in the context of human history whereas what you've got in Hosea chapter 6 is a prophetic reference using the word day what you have in Genesis 1 is a reference towards the natural creation it's at different contexts the other references are referring to human history so you have to examine the context to see which way he should take one of the three definitions and doing that there is a very good evidence that it is a 24-hour period now you know as we've talked that I'm really open to looking at all the options I want to know the truth a lot of people listening want to know what is really the case and you have presented some very good evidence and we need to spend time sifting through pulling these things together and I think for me yom is still a problem and i think for a lot of other people so what would you say that we need to do in seeking truth or good evidence in this area well you know highlight problems I like disagreements because it's a wonderful way to learn I mean every time God takes a dull ache for me it gives me three new ones I didn't know I had in the first place I think that's how God teaches us what I would recommend we have to stop using a charge of heresy or heretic because all that does is raise fear and it shuts down communication we need to open the communication of the people with dialogue without these charges of heresy or you're not a Christian or you're leading people astray I think we can get this settled all it takes is to get people to talk in a peaceable environment where we accept one another's Christian testimony one comment I would make in Hosea chapter six one talks about the day of the Lord that may be a little 24 hour day there's going to be a day when he comes and redeems this world so to take the 300 references where it's clearly a 24 hour day and say we have one where it's questionable it that one still could be a 24 hour day and then to build a whole doctrine based on that one question about verse I think that's real thin ice to be skating on but if you only go one passage in the Bible where number days refer to natural creation that establishes an entirely different context well the basis for an exception I would go back to what I've said many times what your interpretation of Genesis chapter one and chapter two and Exodus 20:11 in the Ten Commandments that interpretation requires a guru to come up with that average person doesn't read it it's not about Genesis 2 in the day that the Lord created in other words that day doesn't refer to just one day I think it does I think in Genesis chapter 2 it says in the day the Lord created the heaven here that's referring to the first day and then it goes right on well so to assume you're talking about that day meaning six days I think you're reading under the text right there most scholars would strongly disagree with you on that I mean even young earth creationists like Henry Morris for example accept the fact that Genesis 2:4 is referring to something other than a 24-hour day well the context is quite clear take a look at yeah I've read it many times the 24-hour day six normal days evening in the morning it's got the the number the first day the second day the third day and I'm sure you can find somebody who speaks Hebrew who will say that's not talking about a 24-hour period but that's only because of what they've been taught here in the twentieth century no that's because of research that I mean that would be like saying that these fellows that we've mentioned that are leading our evangelical seminaries that somehow they've been swayed by the outside world and I'm saying those are some of the strongest Christians I know that called me into obedience to the text so the fact is I think we can disagree but to say that that they're not looking at all the records I just don't think you can do that I don't think you're a heretic because you don't think the days are six days I think if you have death before sin now you've crossed over the line where that's a heretical doctrine and the Bible says there's gonna be heresies and somebody's obviously wrong we can't both be right I think we should discuss this and I'm thrilled to be here I can go all night with this but I think I'm gonna stick with what the scripture plainly teaches it's just reclaiming gleason torture as a heretic I don't know never met him I don't care what anybody believes I care what does the scripture say I can read it and I can understand it I think the average person can - I can't you understand oh that just closes down discussion when you say hey if you believe in long creation days you're a heretic I believe there's death before sin of that doctrine I would put in the category of heresy believing today's our little disconnect that from long creation day well you got a good point there so you better consider what you believe all right question I have a two prong question the first is in as much as creation was an unprecedented activity and and nobody was there is it not reasonable to assume that what we see today in an imperfect world may have been radically different than what was created in a perfect world by God when he looked back at it and said it was very good we'd not maybe the law of physics and thermodynamics have been quite different okay the mistake you're making is you're assuming nobody was there to see it astronomy is a discipline where we cannot measure the present as an astronomer I can't tell you anything about the present universe but we directly observed if you look far enough away we can be direct witnesses to creation so yes through astronomy we can go back in time and actually check the miracles that God had performed this is why the strongest evidences for the God of the Bible and science are coming from astronomy because astronomy is where you get the clear direct witness to creation the other sciences you have to infer it but an astronomy you directly observe it but you're looking back possibly through glasses that are out of focus are you not no not at all I mean if there's a discontinuity in the physics there's no way the astronomer would not see it all you would do is go to a certain star and say wow the physics is different there we don't see that the physics is consistent moreover it's part of the entropic principle if you change in the slightest any of the constants or laws of physics at any time in the history of the universe from the creation event onward you destroy the capacity of the universe to support physical life one reason I can tell you the laws of physics haven't change as you and I are talking to one another right now we wouldn't be able to do that if the laws of physics had ever changed after the creation event but aren't you speaking from a base of knowledge that is is very far from being complete then we use about one tenth of a percent of our brains while I would argue it's complete enough I mean the very fact that we've got telescopes powerful enough to look back to that moment when light first separated from darkness means that we really do have a clear witness okay I would say again I don't think we can measure those distances to the Stars and if we do it does still doesn't prove anything a light year is a is a distance not a time it's the distance that like that that stars what do you do the geometric distances the fact that we have geometric distances out to six billion light-years that's where I am convinced you're mistaken right here I got lots of papers too but let me just say the Bible says very clearly in Exodus chapter 8 we beheld the work of God and you cannot find out what God has done beholding nature whose idea that nature is the 67th book of the Bible really put up red flags with me as I read his work I said oh wait a minute now the Bible says you cannot behold to work they cannot be reckoned up it says in Psalm chapter 40 you can behold God's works but you cannot comprehend them and he's putting an awful lot of eggs in one leaky basket saying that because the stars are his whole argument is the big bang must be true because the stars are 17 or fourteen point nine to 75 whatever it is billion light years away this is simply silly you can't measure those distances your lights been the same and if God can make a full-grown man and a full-grown woman in a full-grown tree he can make stars in light and six times it says he stretched out to heavens what if he made it here and flung him out and it was six thousand years ago and it now appears to be that far away because he flung him out there the text says he continually stretches another I think there's wrong it may still be moving right it's still expanding always has been expanded before a creation event which was six thousand years ago and by the way my only argument is not just that stars exists that's one of 20 independent measures we've got for measuring how long the universe has been expanding if you like I can take it down the other 19 I can give you lots of quotes from astronomers who said the redshift in the early days they thought redshift indicated distance to stars and it may not well we can now confirm that through the equivalent of trigonometric parallax if you miss you can measure trigonometric parallax to six billion light-years I'm gonna have to call you a birthday right here take a look at paper here punch of a scar listen that's not an argument tell me this is your appeal to authorities no this is so classic of what you do and I think if people would read this book you would see I've got so many notes in here that I'd love to go over with you sometime and I think you're a real nice man but I think you're just mistaken scripturally and scientifically on some of these things this universe cannot be billions of years old we've see things winding down that up the fact is if he's wrong scientifically then the paper would be wrong I don't know what's in that paper he's got but to hold up a paper and say here's proof that that doesn't anyway with me at all this isn't difficult to understand any layman can understand these papers I think this paper is real easy to understand any layman can understand this also God made it all in six days and any other interpretation than that requires is a cult you you have we have to have Hugh Ross to tell us what this book says I'm sorry there were people around before you that you uses word cult and heretic and heresy I know it bothers me to have to do that but the Bible warned us those people would come in the last days it really does you know I cuz you're such a nice guy I'm sure some of the Pharisees were nice guys too and gave you their kids camel rides when they got off work but that doesn't mean they're right and so you have to separate you know demeanor and attitude first time Jesus the first time Pharisees mentioned in the Bible Jesus was was accusing them of stuff you know they were wrong now they were good people they were they were morally correct and I'm sure you're a moral person you try to you know treat your wife right and your kids right but that has nothing to do with your doctrine and and if I come across as mean-spirited or whatever and I don't want to do that but if I am that still would have nothing to do with doctrine Elijah and the prophets of bail I mean he killed them how offensive it is for you to call into question my credentials as an astrophysicist I call on you credentials I'm saying what you're teaching is contrary to this book well who says that I say that okay but the fact is there are people that are other Christians that disagree with you on their passage oh yeah I'm sorry and so the fact is is that you can't that's where if we're if we're gonna say that that is the thing where we divide people who are Christian and non-christian then first Corinthians 15 goes out the tubes because this is the gospel that I preached you by which you believe you receive by you're saved either accept that or you're lost and that has a dude that Jesus died for our sins according to the scripture he was he was put into the grave he arose again I think that there are certain things inside the church that we can disagree on and still be believers sure so I think that this is what we're going to drop that word cult well when I see the when I see him teaching it's a local flood in the days of Noah and God designed the world with suffering and death and cruelty and and that's just my here you it the fact is at that point guys like walki and and Gleason Archer disagree with him as well but it's a disagreement inside the circle and what I'm saying is if we're going to have a discussion inside the church on these these questions we should this is fine okay I think that we just need to go on from there well let me define call a cult is where you need a particular leader to tell you what the book says that's why that's what heroes do but the fact is we can't they say that that's true about Genesis 1 and 2 cuz there's a whole lot of passages that I need help on throughout the Bible now Genesis 1 and 2 let's do a survey let's get 5,000 people that have never heard of this argument let's hand them this book and say what does this say hey listen on and second Thessalonians chapter 2 the fact is you can get our thousand Christians together and we've already got a lot of thousand different opinions sure and I'm simply saying that God's got one right way we know that and the fact is we're gonna figure that out but I'm saying to have this discussion now you don't have the end story and neither does Hugh there's assumptions that both of you are making young earth people and old earth people are both making right we're to test those and if the scripture does give us leeway to open up our thinking then I think we've got to go that direction you know the thing I longed for is where we can test this disagreement in front of an audience of Bible scholars and research scientists Christians as well as non-christians when you test it in front of an audience where everybody is credentialed in the field then you can really figure out what's going on what's bogus what's invalid what's on target if you tested communism and capitalism in front of an audience of Soviet scientists you know a person who spent 50 years living in America is going to be heavily indoctrinated by evolution of their you but there you find that you just defined the parameters on that one the fact is would there be a crowd then that we could do that with with evangelical scholars everybody's biased exactly yeah and I'm saying therefore our advice to the Christians is they've got to exam the text each of you have a point of view on this they've gotten look at it let's let's ask the next question here um this is uh - Hugh Ross um I was wondering do you think your theory of creation should be taught in schools and if so how and I think you know the truth of our origin is one of the most important things that in the u.s. right now because uh lots of people are being led away by the teaching though I would strongly argue that we must teach this in the public education arena fact we've noticed that reasons to believe that our speakers of a wide-open door into the public schools secular universities professors are asking us to come into their classrooms and the whole point is you cannot divorce science and theology they overlap there's no significant scientific statement I can think of it doesn't have theological overtones the whole point though is to go into the public school classroom with a demeanor I'm not going to jam this down your throat we're going to lay out the facts we're going to open up the field for discussion in question we're not going to call into question what the textbooks are teaching we're just simply giving you a different perspective a different interpretation on the established facts of nature where you get closed doors is when you call into question the established facts of nature if you don't call into question if you don't try to jam the gospel down people's throats the doors are wide open and the thing I've notice is this if you go into the public school classroom without that pressure motive the students and professors will ask you how to become a Christian first time ever gave a lecture in a public high schools Arcadia High School the leading atheist in the class after was all over said well dr. Ross of all this is true what must I do to avoid judgement I gave the gospel he prayed to receive Christ ten minutes later he led to his atheist friends to Christ we have the public right to do that in a public school classroom I mean the separation of church and state in no way forbids that kind of active going on and I find that even atheist professors are really open to the idea of speakers coming in as long as I don't come in with a Dogma I I guess I'd have to preface that question I'm of a strong even if having taught science 15 years we shouldn't even have public schools according to the Constitution if we're going to have them then who should who should control them and who decides what's taught you cannot discuss origins without getting into religious implications evolution young earth creation old earth creation doesn't matter if you're talking about origins education in general is a religious you know you have to impart religion is tied in with education and there's no such thing as separation of church and state the Constitution never mentions that that's in a letter that a Baptist pastor wrote or Jefferson wrote to a Baptist pastor in 1802 so the Constitution says the state cannot establish a religion and I think we've done that with evolution I speak in public schools all the time I get in lots of public schools and teach young earth creationism I teach on dinosaurs I say kids dinosaurs have always lived with man they did not live millions of years ago people call them dragons and they killed them for years for centuries they were killed by man they're mentioned in the Bible as dragons to mention it all through history there might be a few still alive and I go into some of the cryptozoology stuff so I get in lots of public schools and we win thousands to the Lord so I think schools are open to this and a lot of teachers are scared to to talk about this and they don't need to be we've got a whole videotape just on what can be done in the public school question yes Hugh Ross you how would God communicate in a clear way if it was his intent to do so that he created the earth in six calendar days okay I went in to contrast that with modify Exodus chapter 20 verses 8 through 11 to satisfy that yeah you'd have to change the wording of all 10 creation texts in the Bible to fit that point of view you'd also have to change the Astrophysical record so you're radically you're looking at a radically different Bible as well as a radically different record of nature if I were to see that I would be persuaded how would you change the text how did I change the text well from one thing you would have to take away that whole mission of the evening and morning phrase for the seventh day I would expect to see closure in the Bible on the seventh day rather than the extension of the seventh let's slow that one now because I don't think that's come up before this there's something different in the wording on the seventh day sure that is you're saying a clue to how you interpret the other periods of time morning and evening what is that seventh day what's different about that well I just finished writing a book with five other scholars called the Genesis debate framework hypothesis young earth and day age and was fascinating to me is we took very different positions on the Sabbath the framework people view that the seventh day is eternal the youngers creationists at his 24 hours we took the point of view there was a long but finite period of time that ends with the beginning of the new creation why tell us why okay the text and this is where we were making progress in the debate you know the editor was quite pleased because it says you know there's a lot more clarity in the scripture on the length of the seventh day there other days the text because our folks need to be brought up to speed with your time okay okay Genesis 1 we have closure on the first six days there's an evening the morning for day one two three four five six seven day that's missing it's not closed there's no evening of mourning for the seventh day you read in Psalm 95 in Hebrews four that we're still in the seventh day the seventh day continues through the future you get into revelation 21 God creates again that's the eighth day now what I noted as a 16 year old looking at all this stuff is that you look at the fossil record a huge amount of evidence for speciation before Adam at a rate of one new animal species a year since Adam the speciation rate measures zero as the G is said in John chapter 5 God has indeed ceased performing his creation miracles he continues to form other miracles but God is now in a state of ceasing creation miracles that's the 7th day okay well again I would say if if you can't read Exodus 20:11 and this is the only thing that we're aware of except when Jesus wrote on the ground God wrote this one on a rock with his own finger he said to the Hebrew people I want you to rest on the seventh because or for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth the sea and all that in them is and rested the seventh day here we have a case where God is clearly putting over anybody can understand it these seven days are all the same I think it is true that you know we enter into the rest of Christ which lasts forever thankfully for that but that just because there's the the the rest of God is eternal doesn't mean that seventh day was eternal you have the type you know the Bible says Satan is like a roaring lion well there really are roaring lions you have to have an example to compare it with the Bible says he's like a serpent and there really are serpents and it says God's rest was the eternal but there really was a day of rest the Jews were not commanded to go out and work six million years in rest a million or to work six days and then rest a million otherwise they to work six days and been done they'd still be resting it just simply doesn't make sense all few scripture you see him refer to the seventh day Exodus chapter 31 God said it is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth and on the seventh day he rested these messages are as clear as you claim the preposition is not in the original neither ik Exodus 31 or Exodus 20 there's three other passages the Levitical law that also reflect this statement okay you've got Leviticus 25 referring to the agricultural land I mean you can read the Bible scholar literature on this it's not as clear-cut as you claim well what you're saying is that in that terms of the Leviticus passage concerning harvest it talks about in the day of harvest walki and archer would say you don't have harvest in one 24-hour period of time it may be in the fall maybe in the spring whatever the climate and so on so I think that's what you're saying isn't it right no I'm referring to Leviticus 25 which states that the land is to be worked for six one-hour periods and given a Sabbath rest of one year so there's an example instead of sure we got a different Sabbath period than the other thing is that in the Exodus passages you also have the Feast of Tabernacles you also have the commemoration going back to the days of wandering in the wilderness and the time that is set for the celebration or the commemoration is not the same as what they went through doesn't that seem to open up the door that the same thing is going on in terms of the Sabbath rust well there are several different Sabbath's the Bible talks about there was the six-day week and the seventh day of rest there was the six years of plowing the field on the seventh year of rest and then there's the year of Jubilee the 7/7 you put it all together on the fiftieth year you rest but that has nothing to do with the creation week the fact is it was a six-day creation and a seventh day of rest how he applies that to the creation week blows my mind I mean just read the text it's talking about six days of work and a seventh day of rest but there's a tenth verse between verse nine and eleven that you've dropped out verse nine is referring to you know the rest period of human beings verse 11 - the rest period of God there's nothing in the text that says that there's an exact equation between the context of verse 9 and verse 11 you know God works 6 periods he rests on the seventh period we work 6 periods we rest in the seventh period as Paul points out in Romans 14 the critical principle is one of six and one doesn't matter when we celebrate the Sabbath what matters is that we do take one day at a seven as a Sabbath period arrest let me read it to you cuz I don't want to be accused believing something I'll start in verse eight remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the by God in it thou shalt not do any work thou nor thy son nor thy daughter thy manservant nor thy maidservant thy cattle nor thy stranger that is within thy gates for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth the sea and all that in them is and rested the seventh day wherefore the Lord hallowed or blessed the seventh day and hallowed it then it was on to the next commandment honor your father and mother this passage couldn't be more clear this is six normal days and a seventh day of rest you know the prepositions not there in the original and you know where we have to have you to tell us what this says again let me you know the fact is the argument that yeah never means anything else in the Hebrew Bible but a literal 24 hours is completely untenable in the light of scriptural usage elsewhere that's why our two leading evangelical scholars I never said I have never said that Yama always means a 24-hour day when it's put with the modifiers evening morning the first day the second day then it always means a 24-hour day so what passage of Scripture hew do you have where its uses evening and morning I mean Jesus was in the grave for three days how long was he in the grave okay in the Book of Daniel we have numbered days that are not 24-hours partly with evenings and mornings in the book of Hosea I know what's the one in Daniel you're talking about here okay I think it's chapter 10 okay but you can check our website we've got an article written by one of our scholars on what Daniel says about the evenings and mornings we also have a piece on hosea chapter 6 I'm talking about the prophecy of Daniel where he's talking about in the end times about the how the Israelites will be without a king for one day in two days and the third day they would have their king and most Bible scholars believe is referring to that time period when Israel the Land of Israel is without a Jewish king and indeed we know that for 2,000 years of the human history the land has been without a king alright we had a question here in comparison I have a real easy question does the Bible teach that there was a time that the earth was packed in ice or the Ice Age theory and if so did it occur in Chapter 1 of Genesis between verses 1 & 2 yeah the only passages I'm aware of are in the books of the Psalms and the Proverbs was what a job as well which makes the point that God controls the quantity of snow frost and ice for the benefit of all life and you know as a physicist I can tell you that you do need this regular cycling of water through all three states you know what makes life possible on planet Earth is not just that we got liquid water but we have a huge quantity of frozen water liquid water and water vapor and you need these to be cycling in order for particularly advanced light to be possible on planet earth so that's the most direct reference I could find the bible for an ice age but I wouldn't say it's proof of an ice a just simply proof that there are these large quantities of frozen water that do cycle through our environment right I don't think I would disagree with what he said there that's still what had nothing to do with when this happened I think you'll find most young earth creationists would fall into two camps of what the ice age some would say like I happen to be in the camp that the ice age was probably what caused the flood others would say the flood caused the ice age you know minor difference but we've got a whole videotape we call it the whole Venn theory so nobody else gets blamed for it about how the ice age probably was caused by a meteor strike some ice to our questions and that's it for tonight okay dr. Hogan you've talked several times to talk about the Bible and the fact that the only correct interpretation of Genesis in your mind is that which a a simple person or a person with no exposure to the Bible would come up with if he gave him the Bible to read I wouldn't say that I don't know what that word in my mouth if you gave this book to 5,000 people who didn't care about the argument they would all come back and say it says six days that's the obvious reading of the text that's my point okay well one of the great things about the Bible is that you have a simple statement like a teaching by Jesus a parable let's say and you look at a simple statement a child can understand that and get something profound out of that but yet as you grow and maturity and knowledge you find that there's different levels of understanding there's a depth of truth in Scripture wouldn't you say it's possible that what dr. Ross is doing what other scientists are doing is using their god-given abilities and the knowledge that's increasing now to unpack Genesis 1 and 2 and go beyond the simple God created which is sufficed for many people for many years to an understanding of how God created well I think you've got a faulty analogy here a five-year-old can look at a TV and understand what he sees as a person grows he gets there are different levels of understanding an electronics engineer looks at a TV and sees it very differently he sees wow look at the magnetic field being deflected you know the dot being reflected all over the screen and how many lines are on the screen different people can look at the same thing none of them are wrong one has more understanding but to say that the five-year-old reads Genesis and says well he did it in six days and then later he finds out his initial interpretation was wrong that's that's not that's not what happens well let me put in different context you read Genesis 1 and it says 6 days I agree with that ok ok that's the simple reading of the text now you decide to go back to the text and say I'm gonna dig a little bit deeper and see exactly what these 6 days are and can't you do that with every passage of the Bible there's an immediate context you can pull it at the text that doesn't take very deep study but I would argue every chapter the Bible King you can return to it and learn a whole lot more you never picked up the first time yeah but see no you got a faulty analogy also because you're saying as you get deeper you now have an interpretation that is contrary to your initial trepidation not at all yeah that's what you just said stating you get deeper six long periods of time are totally consistent there's no contradiction well see the problem is that quickly leads into death before sin a go flood and some of the other things that you teach that are just simply not true not scriptural and yet you're trying all right let's pick it up here hold on for days 1 2 3 4 5 & 6 it has that evening and morning phrase this is for dr. Ross why would they even have to mention evening in morning and what couldn't they just say it was the first and it was the first day it was the second day what could evening possibly mean I know there's different means per day but what about evening I made reference to this paper by our theologian friend Paul Elbert who analyzes very thing about evenings and mornings and you know he makes the point not made of myself that just like the Hebrew word yama has got three different literal definitions likewise the Hebrew words translated evening a morning of multiple literal definitions and his point is that this is a reference to the fact that these first six days have a beginning they have an ending the seventh day has got a beginning but doesn't yet have an ending that's what's being communicated in the text and a hey if you subscribe to our FAQs for faith magazine you will see this future article by Paul Albert okay I guess I would stick with what I've said so far the obviously obviously the seventh day is the same as the other days because it's lumped all together with them in Exodus 20 and in Exodus 31 and there isn't I mean the whole idea of you work six days and then you rest from then on who wouldn't want a job like that I'd like one of those jobs I mean that's just simply not the way it is there's a seven-day week and the seventh day does this the original day as I close now the rest of God does not have a closed but I'm not God well I would argue that the seventh day of God will close in the future when he conquers evil then we're going to see the 8th creation day God's gonna create again brand new creation radically different physics radically different dimensionality God will cease his rest so just like his rest period comes to an end so does our respiratory come to an end I think what you're trying to do is go beyond the point that it's six work periods and one recipe in fact our pastor has argued that we shouldn't be taking Saturday and Sunday off we should only get one day off for a week because the Scriptures say you're supposed to work six days but I would argue who of us doesn't work when we're home Saturday or Sunday all right guys I just want to say thank you for all that you've shared with us and my hope is that those of you that are watching that you will let this material be that which will motivate you to dig into the scripture and hopefully it's turned on the lights in your mind as to the relationship of Scripture and science and that this will increase your faith in the God of the Bible so guys again I want to say thank you for being here and for all that you've done and for those of you that have listened you [Applause]
